8. BS PFAL. Qo STATE OF FLORIDA Dy aw, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, =“. 5% FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD ©. ~ ty “ _ FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & og “PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE, Petitioner, Vv. CASE NO. 2001501156 DOREEN H. CAMPBELL, Respondent. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT The Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate ("Petitioner") files this Administrative Complaint against Doreen H. Campbell (“Respondent”), and alleges: ESSENTIAL ALLEGATIONS OF MATERIAL FACT 1. Petitioner is a state government licensing and regulatory agency charged with the responsibility and duty to prosecute Administrative Complaints pursuant to the laws of the State of Florida, including Section 20.165 and Chapters 120, 455 and 475 of the Florida Statutes, and the rules promulgated thereunder. 2. Respondent is currently a Florida state-certified residential real estate appraiser having been issued license RD 0001596 in accordance with Chapter 475 Part Il of the Flonda Statutes. 3. The last license the State issued to Respondent was as a state-certified residential real estate appraiser at 10810 NW 20" Street, Pembrook Pines, Florida 33026. FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell . Case No. 2001501156 Administrative Complaint - 4. On or about May 9, 2000, Respondent and Sonia Alvarez (Alvarez) developed and communicated an appraisal report (Report) for property commonly known as 1977 NW 100" Way, Pembrook Pines, Florida 33024 (Subject Property), which estimated the market value as of May 6, 2000, as $215,000. A copy of the Report is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 1. : 5, The Report indicated that Respondent was the supervisory appraiser and that she inspected Subject Property. 6. Ina letter dated March 7, 2002, Respondent stated that she did not inspect Subject Property. A copy of the letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 2. 7. Respondent failed to properly supervise Alvarez, a state registered assistant real estate appraiser in the development of the Report. 8. The Report contained the following errors: a. Incorrectly indicated the census tract information for Subject Property. b. Incorrectly indicated the FEMA map number information for Subject Property. c. Indicated the sales price for comparable sale two as $239,000, when in fact the salesprice was $235,000. d. Incorrectly indicated the legal description for Subject Property. e. Incorrectly indicated that Subject Property was not located within a planned unit development (PUD) and that there were no common recreational elements when in FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell Case No. 2001501156 Administrative Complaint fact the Subject Property was located within a PUD that included common elements. f. Failed to state the type of report Respondent developed and communicated. 9. During the course of the official investigation, Respondent provided Petitioner’s investigator with a copy of her entire workfile for Subject Property. 10. Documents contained within Respondent’s workfile and public records available to her during the development of the Report indicated two prior sales of Subject Property that took place on or about November 22, 1999, for $181,000, and $215,000. 11. Pursuant to an official investigation, Alvarez admitted to Petitioner’s investigator that she was aware of the two prior sales of Subject Property that took place on or about November 22, 1999. 12. The Report indicated the sale of Subject Property for $181,000, but failed to indicate or explain the sale for $215,000. 13. Onor about February 5, 2002, the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board entered an Order adopting a Stipulation in which Respondent admitted that she violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Appraisal Practice (USPAP), was guilty of having failed to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal report, and was guilty of culpable negligence or breach of trust in a business transaction. A copy of the Final Order is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 3. COUNT I Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of culpable negligence or breach of trust in 3 FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell : Case No. 2001501156 Administrative Complaint an appraisal assignment in violation of Section 475.624(2), Florida Statutes. . COUNT II Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has been found guilty, for a second time, of any misconduct that warrants disciplinary action, or has been found guilty of a course of conduct or practice which shows she is incompetent, negligent, dishonest, or untruthful to an extent that those which whom she may sustain a confidential relationship may not safely do so in violation of Section 475.624(10), Florida Statutes. COUNT II . Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes. “COUNT IV Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of having failed to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal report in violation of Section 475.624(15), Florida Statutes. ~ WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board, or the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, as may be appropriate, to issue a Final Order as final agency action finding the Respondent(s) guilty as charged. The penalties which may. be imposed for violation(s) of Chapter 475 of the Florida Statutes, depending upon the severity of the offense(s), include: revocation of the license, registration, or certificate; suspension of the license, registration or certificate for a period not to exceed ten (10) years; imposition of an administrative fine of up to $5,000 for each count or offense; imposition of investigative costs; 4 FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell Case No. 2001501156 Administrative Complaint issuance of a reprimand; imposition of probation subject to terms including, but not limited to, requiting the licensee, registrant, or certificate holder to complete and pass additional appraisal education courses; publication, or any combination of the foregoing which may apply. See Section 475.624, Florida Statutes and Rule 61J1-8.002, Florida Administrative Code. The penalties which may be imposed for violation(s) of Chapter 455 of the Florida Statutes, depending upon the severity of the offense(s), include: revocation of the license, registration, or certificate; suspension of the license, registration, or certificate for a period not to exceed ten (10) years; imposition of an administrative fine of up to $5,000 for each count or offense; imposition of investigative costs; issuance of a reprimand; imposition of probation subject to terms including, but not limited to, requiring the licensee, registrant, or certificate holder to complete and pass additional appraisal education courses; publication; restriction of practice; injunctive or mandamus relief; imposition of a cease and desist order; or any combination of the foregoing which may apply. See § 455.227, Fla. Stat. (1999) and Fla. Admin. Code R. 61J1-8.002. SIGNED this_(g_ day of Chuplsct , 2002. ys arp & Fiori epartment of Business and tne, 0 If & D Professional Regulation WVision ofa By: ki ” of p Song ! Director, Division of Real Estate iE Re, R « a Esta Ula enc) @ }. Py ft FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell Case NoHpisoi1s6¢* a Administrative Complaint le y <#> y oe eid Y} : v a~ ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER Stacy N. Robinson Pierce Fla. Bar No. 0182796 FDBPR-Division of Real Estate. Legal Section 400 W. Robinson Street, N308A Orlando, Florida 32802-1772 (407) 481-5632 (407) 317-7260 - FAX PCP: JB/MC/CK 8/02 NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS PLEASE BE ADVISED that mediation under Section 120.573 of the Florida Statutes, is not available for administrative disputes involving this type of agency action. PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that pursuant to this Administrative Complaint you may request, within the time proscribed, a hearing to be conducted in this matter in accordance with Sections 120.569 and 120.57 of the Florida Statutes; that you have the right, at your option and expense, to be represented by counsel or other qualified representative in this matter; and that you have the right, at your option and expense, to take testimony, to call and cross-examine witnesses, and to have subpoena and subpoena duces tecum issued on your behalf if a formal hearing is requested. PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that if you do not file an Election of Rights form or some other responsive pleading with the Petitioner within twenty-one (21) davs of receipt of this Administrative Complaint, the Petitioner will file with the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board a motion requesting an informal hearing and entry of an appropriate Final Order which may result in the suspension or revocation of your real estate license or registration. Please see the enclosed Explanation of Rights and Election of Rights form. APPRAISAL OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT: 1977 NW 100TH WAY DOWERMAN PLAT PEMBROKE PINES, FL 33024 FOR: MORTGAGE CAPITAL OF AMERICA AS OF: MAY 6, 2000 BY: SONIA ALVAREZ for CAMPBELL & ASSOC. < Misie. AL EXHiB: a 3 GE (_ or a2 ly Form GAt — ‘TOTAL 2000 for wate appraisal Software by ala midde; The. x ‘CREME SSC + { ? SUMMARY OF SALIENT FEATURES Subject Address 1977 NW 100TH WAY Logal Desciiption DOWERMAN PLAT Chy PEMBROKE PINES County BROWARD Sais FL Tp Cods 33024 Census Tract RS-7 Map Reference 51-41-08 Sale Price $ 215,000 PNDG CONTRACT \ Borrower / Client McCOY MORTGAGE CAPITAL OF AMERICA Lender Ste (Square Feet) 2,743 g Price pet Square Foot, $ 78.38 a Location ‘ SUBURBAN/AVG Ey Age 19991) . & i Condition GOOD FA Total Rooms 9 2 -§ Bedrooms 4 Baths SONIA ALVAREZ for CAMPBELL & ASSOC. Appralser Date of Appraised Value MAY 6, 2000 Final EsSonzte of Value $ 215,000 s/ Fonn SSD — ‘TOTAL 20C0 for Windows" appraisal software by a la mode, Inc. — 1-260-ALAMODE 7 [ ¢ seer tw 7 G 7 oo 41 a, « Compticl hk Asoxchios Apprbess, re. Property Deserition UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT ioe, INVOCSO1 Ey Propotty Addrass_1977 NW 100TH WAY Cty PEMBROKE PINES Stee FL Tip Coe 33024 BSS Legal Descriction DOWERMAN PLAT __ County BROWARD. _ PA Assessor's Parce! No, 51~-41-09-22-6620 ___Tar Yeu 1999 RE. Tas $000 Sorta Ascesemerts $0.00 Bormower_McCOY Curent Owner WILSON Occuprd: [Lovin fF} Tenart fe] vo. Property datts apprised LX} Feo Sima |} Leasehold Project Tyra_[_] Pu TT condamintum (HUO/VA ont) HOA $ 65 DO/MO Nelghbortood of Project Vama SEE AGOVE LEGAL DESCRIPTION hiap Reference 51-41-08 Census Tcl RS-7 Sele Pca $ 215,000 Date of Sa PNOG CONTRACT Psscrigton and § amount of lom chargss/concesstons to be paid by seer NONE DISCLOSE LendayCient MORTGAGE CAPITAL OF AMERICA Adikess MIRAMAR, FL. BED pnomsiser SONIA ALVAREZ for CAMPBELL & ASSC_ Atkins 10610 NW 20TH STREET, PEMBROKE PINES, Fl, 33026 MN Location C] Uta CJ suburban) Rud Predominant Binge lamby fous Present land use Se Lend ues ct § cuit up Clovrrsx 6425-758 [juniarasx | cecupaney | fie fo) losetamiy 70 | rote Co Gowhrete = Kjrmt - .CJsee (1) Sow © ower 130 Low NEW |2-4famly _ 05 ("} tn process WY Property values tocreastg «= EX) Sebe = ] Deen O Tereet 250 High 10 |Mutbfamity 10 | To: 7 TAXES NOT * A Ocmandsuppty (| Shortage Indatarce F) over supply | G2) vacant (osx) BGSzRy Predominant FRY TF commercial 10 | ACCESSED Marketing tme [| under 3 mos. [X) 3-6 mos. [| Over 6 mos. | [| vaciove sx) | 200'S VARIES | Vacant 05 Hote: Raco and the racial composition of the nelghberhood are not appralaal fsctors, Heighbotbood boundates end charactereties: + _THE SUBJECT IS BOUND BY THE NORTH=SHERIDAN ST; SOUTH=PINES BLVO. :\\ fl] AVE.; EAST=DOUGLAS ROAD, THIS IS A PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD IN SW BROWARD COUNTY, Z Factors that fect the maketabiMy of tie properties In the neighborhood {proximty to employment and amenities, employment stabllty, appea! t martot poy .): THE AREA HAS CONVENIENT ACCESS TO SUPPORTING AMENITIES, INCLUDING SCHOOLS, EMPLOYMENT, SHOPPING, PUE TRANSPORTATION AND MAJOR THOROFARES/TRAFFIC ARTERIES. HOMES ARE MOSTLY OLOER, MEDIUM-SIZED AND. DETACHED. MAINTENANCE AND CONDITION ARE AVERAGE TO GOOD. NO ADVERSE NEIGHBORHOOD TRENDS WERE NO § THE AREA(S CONSIDERED TO HAVE POSITIVE APPEAL TO THE HOME-BUYING MARKET. | Market conditions In the subject neighborhood (cluding support for the above conclusions rete to the trend of property values, demand'suppily, and marketing time + such as data on compettive properties for sa In the nelyhbortod, description cf the prevalence of sales and financing concessions, etc,}: 4 THE GENERAL AREA MARKET IS STABLE AND ACTIVE, WITH TYPICAL FINANCING IN THE FORM OF NEW, CONVENTIONAL A MORTGAGES. SOME FHA & VA TRANSACTIONS WERE ALSO NOTED IN RECENT SALE RECORDS. INTEREST BUYOOWNS A! 4 OTHER SALES CONCESSIONS DO NOT APPEAR COMMON OR NECESSARY. ADJUSTMENTS FOR NON-TYPICAL FINANCING, WHEN MADE, ARE NOT TYPICALLY DOLLAR-FOR-DOLLAR, BUT RATHER REFLECT THE PERCEIVED EFFECT ON MARKET VA! fy CAUSED BY THE FINANCING, {F ANY, Fe pe Project information for PUDs [if appticably ++ Is tm developed builder in control of the Home Owreis’ Association (HOA)? Lives Ly) tio NIA a Approximate total number cf units In the subject project N/A. Approximate total aumber of untts for sale in the subject prosect NiA Describe common eements and merestional hiities: NOT A PUD—NO COMMON RECREATIONAL ELEMENTS Otmensions 57 X 100 Topography LEVEL, ABOVE ST GRA! H Ste zrea _5,700 SQFT Comer Lot {_] Yes No | Ste TYPICAL FOR AREA Specific zoning classification end description _RS-7, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Shae CTANGULAR A Zoning compkance (X) Legal {_] Legal nonconforming (Grandtathered use) [_] tlegal [J No zoning Drainage PEARS ADEQUATE _ chest & bestuse as tmoroved _{X] Presertuse [| Other vse (explaiol Vew AVGIGD RESID ag UtiRien Public Other Otf~alte Improvements: Type Pubic Private } Landscaping GOOD TYPICAL OF ARE FE] Eecticty () FLPOWER & LIGH| Street ASPHALT & ()_ |orveway Sutace CONCRETE PAVERS bad Ges Q Cutyguter NONE] Apparerteasements_TYPICAL UTILITY EASE? Water Siewak _CONCRETE Cl] fren Sect Food Hzadéra Od Yes A santa sewer (XI : Sueet Ights INCANDESCENT CJ) | REMAZore ZONE AH Map Dee 08/18/% Bx Storm sever [7] Mey NONE. [1 (7) [Fess Map No. 1201100315 F Comments (apparent adverse easernents, encioachments, special assessments, slide areas, illegal or legal noncortorming 2cring use, etc.): SUBJEC LOT 1S TYPICAL & CONFORMING WITH OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD LOTS. NO ADVERSE EASEMENTS, ENCROACHIENTS OR OTHER ADVERSE SITE CONDITIONS WERE OBSERVED. FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION, SEE LIMITING CONDITIONS, fF GEIERAL DESCRIPTION EXTER'OR DESCRIPTION FOUSIOATION BASEMENT INSULATION Ho, of Units ONE ew REINF CONCRI|Sbb CONCRETE Area Sq. Ft Root No. of Stories Two Exerc Wats = CBS Creal Space NIA % Fished N/A Celng _ AVG Fed Typo (Ost/att) © DETACHED |Roct Surface CEMENT TILE _|Basement NONE NIA Wats Design (Sty'e) 2STY MEDI | Gutters & Dwnspts. N/A Sump Pump N/A Bs N/A ~ | Foot AY Existing Proposed EXISTING __|\Window Type SUDERS Dampress N/A Fest NiA None Ags (Y1s} 4899(1) Storm’Screens NO/ALUMINUM |Settement NONE Ov’side Entry NYA UnixergR-VALU i Effective Age (Yrs) NEW ‘Manctactured House N/A Infestation _ NONE STD FOR AGE/ Es ROOMS Foyer Lying Ohrg Kichen | Den | FamiyRm. | Rec. Rm. |Bedrooms) # Baths | Laundry Other | Area S Hg Basement : i} Fa bevel 4 1 1 4 | 1 5 | 1 1 Fo Level 2 i} 4 3 | [ 2 it L { | | 5 Rinished area sbove grace contains: 9 Rooms; 4 Bedroom(s); 3.5 Bath{s): 2,743 saan Fest ct Gross Lhving ¢ 3 ANTERIOR MMaterb's’Condiion KEATG YES KITCHEN EQUIP, _ AMET ES CAS STU LJ Ficors CARPETICER. TILE |Tyx2 © _REVCYCI|Retrigentor {X) Fireptsce's) # ( Wals DRYWALUNEW Ful «= ELECTR |Range/Oven OX) [_] |Pat) CONCRETE 3 B4 TivFlish _WOOD/PAINTINEW |cendtion NEW |Disposad Deck NONE Bah Foot «CERAMIC TILE/NEW |CCOUNS CENTRA |Dishwaster (J & |Porch COV.ENTRY 14) Bath Walnscot CERAMIC TILE/NEW {Central YES Fantoed «= (K] Force NONE ¥ Doors FRENCHWOODINE joter FANS |Mcrowze (X] [_] |Pool ONE &} ABOVE MATLS IN NEW COND. |Condtion NEW __|WasheyDryer im Addtonal features (special energy etficlert tems, etc.): COVERED ENTRY, CEILING FANS, FRENCH DOORS, UPGRADED APLLIANCES 3 a SEPERATE UTILITY ROOM AND 2 CAR GARAGE. B54 Condition of the impr 45, denteclation (physical, funcional, and extemal), tepuks needed, qualty of construction, temozeling/additions, eic.: THE SUBJECT IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN ADEQUATELY MAINTAINED AND ARE PRESENTLY IN NEW CONDITION, WITH NO. FUNCTIONAL OR EXTERNAL INADEQUACIES O8SERVED AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION. =HYSICAL DEPRECIATION EQUATES NORMAL WEAR FOR THE AGE & TYPE OF DWELLING. ti Adverse environmental conditions (such 2s, | .2 net Emited to, hazardous wastes, toxic substances, eic.) presert in the ents, on the $22, or hy the Immedits vicinity of the subject property.: NO OB8VIOUS, VISIBLE EVIDENCE OF ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS. FOR i FURTHER INFORMATION, SEE LIMITING CONDITIONS PAGE 1, ITEM 6. THE APPRAISER IS NOT AN ENVIRONMENTS Freddie bic Form 70 6/93 “ PAGE 1 OF 2 Farvie Mae Form 100- From HS? — STATS) 9900 few Wintour! anaricd ontwar hy 2b mode Ine —. SSA AMADE slis atystlon Section UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT nets, _iyoosc1 Fy ESTIMATED SITE VALUE... . ss $9,000 |Comments on Cost Approach (such as, source of cost estimats, si Ka ESTIMATED REPRODUCTION COST-NSW-0/ t calcukdion ara tor HiID, VA arel FmHA, the estimated comin BEY Dialing 2743 FL @$_6500_=$ 178,295 eof tha prcraty): COST DATA FROM MERSHAL 59. P. @S x SWIFT GUIDE FOR SUBJECT CHARACTERISTICS, Aty a ; — LOCAL DATA KNOWN TO APPRAISER (LOCAL BUILO! Gaay/Capot 440 Sg R@$_ 20.00 = 8,800 COSTS, IMPACT FEES) Total Estimated Cost New 0. ss 487,095, LAND-TO-VALUE RATIO IS TYPICAL OF AREA; HO VAI 2 Less Ptysea | Furetiond Extend RAPACT. Deareclation SEE ATTACHED SKETCH FOR LAYOUT & LIVING ARE 187,100 | RECENT LOT SALES UNAVAILABLE, LOT VALUE. 3,000 | EXTRACTED FROM MARKET, IMPROVED SALES. EX. 245,100 | & SITE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDED AT CONTRIBUTO EH Deprecated Value of Improvements. GROWNDED)..... Fh *As-ts* Value of Se Improvements .... LDSC.PVG. Wal PIDKATEO VALUE BY COSTAPPROACH TEM. SUBJECT COMPARABLE 140, 4 COMPARABLE NO. 2 COMPARABLE 19.3 4977 NW 100TH WAY 2031 NW 99TH TERR 13026 NW 14TH STREET 4877 NVd 127TH AVE FH] Address PEMBROKE PINES, FL PEMBROKE PINES PEMBROKE PINES PEMBROKE PINES Proumty fo Subject (mauEeeeeaali heaved] NEXT DEVELOPMENT (2 BLKS [1 4/72 MILES SOUTH-SW 11/2 MILES SOUTH-Svi Sates Price $ 215,000 ani eeaaea 5 Meas 235 900 | ARES Eyer ¢ Price/Gross LWing Area_|$ els aml § 90.63 OPER § 89.09 O} Dxa and/or INSPECTION, iS(] ISCNET/MLS/PUBLIC RECORD |!SCNET/MLS/PUBLIC RECORD ISCNETMLS/PUBL RL VetFcation Source f OWNER, MLS, EX | VISUAL EXTER/EXPERIAN VISUAL EXTER/EXPERIAN VISUAL EXTER/EXPERI VALUE ADJUSTMENTS: DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION tL F(e)$ Adhist CESCRIPTION t+ fe] Achest DESCRIPTION ioe} Saks orfrenchg =f Pere CONVIFIXED =} CONV : NIA : Consessions Payette: i] $163,600 i NIA i NIA Date of SalyTims tates tex] 02/00 : 03/00 : 03/00 : Loczion sus AVG | SUBURAN/AVG._ | SUBURBAN/AVG | SUBURBANIAVG | Leasehoki Foo Simple FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE H FEE SIMPLE i T FEE SIMPLE 5,700 SQFT SIMILAR =/- ! 6,800 SQFT t 8.398 SQFT AVG/GD RESID _| AVG/GD RESID. H AVG/GD RES!O. : AVG/GD RESIO Oeskm and Appeal 2STY MEDIT/AV_| 2STY/MEDITIAV_! 2STYMEDIMIAV | MEDIT/AVG. Pa Cualty of Construction CBS/AVERAGE_ { C8SS/AVG ‘ CBSIAVG Hi CBS/AVG a Ace 4999(1) 2000(NEW) A 4999(1) : 1998(2) ‘ Condtion GOOD GOOD A Good H GOOD Hl Bid Above Grice Tota: Bdims: Bzths | Tota :Bdans' Baths } Total ‘Bdmms ;_Baths j Total ‘Borms! Bats | Fa Room Court gig:i3s {si 4: 253 +7,500 [_10' 5 $35} g i's $25: + FI Gross ting Area 2,743 Sa. 2,400 Sq. PL i 6,100 2,647 Sq.Ft.’ 1,700 2,430 $9, Ft." ; Ed Basement & Fished NIA : NIA : NIA : 8 Rooms Below Grade NIA : NIA ‘ NIA ‘ ostional UWity AVERAGE i AVERAGE f AVERAGE : CENTRAL AC? CENTRAL AIC! CENTRAL AC! ‘STD INSULATION: STD INSULATION: STO INSULATION 2CAR GARAGE _! 2CAR GARAGE _! 2CAR GARAGE , COV.ENT PORC : COV.ENT PORC ! SCR.PARIO : BA Feplace(s), etc NOFP. NO FIP i NO EP : NO FP. : Ferce, Pool, etc. NO FENCE ‘ |NOFENCE i} WO FENCE i Kitch Eot, Extras B UPOKIT&EQT | UPOKIT&EQT total) Adjusted Sales Price of Comparable g RECORDS’ SQ FT AND OURS IS BECAUSE WE MEASURED THE SUBJECT, SALE'S #283 ARE FURTHER AWAY; THIS IS NOT "ADVERSE ANO WITHIN FNMA GUIDELINE'S. THESE ARE THE THREE BEST (MOST RECENT) AND SIMILAR. SALES AVAILABLE - THIS TIME. FTEM | SUBJECT COMPARABLE 100, 1 | COMPARABLE 199.2 COMPARABLE HO. 3 ie Dats, Price and Daa PRIOR TO THIS !| PRIOR TO THE ABOVE SALE | PRIOR TO THE ABOVE SALE | PRIOR TO THE ABOVE Source, for prior sales LAST SOLD 11/9:} NO SALE RECORD WITHIN LAST SOLD MAY 1999, NO SALE RECORD WIT whhtn year of appraisal 481,000. _~ THE PAST 12 MONTHS @_ $202,800. {THE PAST 12 MONTHS Analysis of any current asreement of sale, opton, ot isting of subject property and analysis of any pats sales of subject anc comparables within one year of the cate of appra: faa BASED UPON PRIOR SALES HISTORY, THE MARKET APPEARS STABLE, THE SUBJECT IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONTRACT + BA 215,000,PER OWNER & CONTRACT. THE SUBJECT IS THE LAST NEW MODEL TO BE SOLO IN NORMANDY. * Ee INOXATED VALUE BY SALES COMPARISON APPROACH ceeccereeterers ff HDICATED VALUE BY INSOME APPROACH (f Arofcable) —_Esttnated Market NIA, fdo, x Gross Rent blunip’s This appraisal & mae OY ‘ats subject to the mepais, aterctions, Insrections or conditions fisted below {_] subject to completion per plans & spr ca) 4 Condiions of Anprisd: THE SUBJECT IS APPRAISED “AS IS" AND THE REPORT IS SUBJECT TO THE ATTACHED STATEMENT OF LUMITING CONDITIONS, ASSUMES NO HIODEN DEFECTS. M Final Reconciliation: All approaches to value hava been considered and analyzed as to their reliability and apalicasilty. tn the fina! analysis, pe Sales Comparison (ot Market) Apcroach is weighted, as most reflective of the actions of buyers & seljers in the marketplace. The Cost Med Azoroach is also agnlied, and it is co-supporbve of the value indicated by the Market_insufficient rental data for teliable GRM. Income 2 The purpose of thls appraisal ls to estiaale the masket value of the real property tht is the subject cf this report, based cn the above cond’ions and the certifczicn, cortings ard fmiting cor] Sons, avd market value Cefrtion that are stated In the attached Frect’e hac Form 438 FHMA form 10043 (Revised 06/93 F2] | yi ESTIUATH THE NARKET VALUS, AS DEFUIED, OF THE REAL PROPERTY THATS THE SUSVECT OF THIS REPCET, AS OF MAY 6, 2006 £59 ciHiCH IS THE DATE OF INSPECTION AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS REPORT) TO BE s 215,000 idential Real Estate Appraiser SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (OLY IF REQUIAS! pPoREEN H. CAMPBELL p) sme AVE yuh oa Ci FaELDS ASSOC. tame D.H.CAMPBELL fet CAMPBELL B ASSOC, Inspect Prope” A De Report Seed MAY 9, 2000 i. Date Reger Saad MAY 9, 200 Pa) State Certification #_ Stato Reg Asst Rest” uate Appraiser Stale FL State Certfiedion #_RDOOC159S FAY 0: Stste Lense # 10004162 State FL, 0: Stz2lkense # State Certified Residential Real Esta Freddie flac Form 70 6/93 Y PAGE 2 OF 2 : Form UA2 — ‘TOTAL 2000 for Windows" appraisal software by a fa mode, inc, — 1-800-ALAMODE UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT MARKET DATA ANALYSIS Te mn to those dems of significant varladan between the sud) and comparable properties. a significant item Inthe comparable property is Superior to, oF mare se rece sales, GT propenies wa Most SMUT and ploxincte to subject and hive been Tonsived mba maket analyst. the ceseriplon includes a dollar adjust: market te iY c a f tzvorable than, the subject property, a minus (-} agjustment is made, thus reducing the indicated vatue at the Subject, tf a signficart tem in the comparable Is Infertor to, of les faccrable than, the subjsct property. a plus (+) adjusters b mate, thus Increasing the indicafed value of lhe subject. se et SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO. 4. —T COMPARABLE HO. 5 COMPARABLE HO. & : 4977 NW 100TH WAY 9913 NW 20TH STREET ° . Addess PEMBROKE PINES, FL PEMBROKE PINES, FL Proximty ta Sublect ESR SAME DEVELOPMENT Ce Saks Price $ 215,000 [Sa SVC S 185,000 THES RS Price/Gross Ling Area_[$ ols 71.13 PagaE EET § O eee Data andror INSPECTION, IS¢| ISCNET/PUBLIC RECORD Vertication Sources | OWNER,MLS,EX EXPERIAN,MLS, VISUAL EXTE eee DESCRIPTION 1 +{-}$ Adust, CESCRIPTION t +(-)$ Adust, DESCRIPTION SEIT ; 7 chaste 07/99 H 1 SUBURBAN/AVG | SUBURBAN/AVG ! : [_Lamobokifeo Sknpis__| FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE L : Sto 5,700 SQFT 5,700 SQFT : : 8. Vew AVGIGD RESIO_{AVGIGD RESIO | t 2 Design and Apoeal 2STY MEDM/AV_| 2STY MEDIT/AV + : FT quatty of Construction | CBSIAVERAGE | CBS/AVERAGE i FAY Ace 1899(1) 1997(3) H H £4 conition Good GOOD. im : = Above Grade Jota iBcms! Bats | Total !Bosms: Baths } Tota ‘Bdims! Baths + Totid_‘8drms: Bats ' f=§ Room Court 93 4 135 qo: 5 3353 H A : : : : Ee} Gross Uving Area 2,743 $3. R. 2,601 Sa. FL: +2,600 $9. Pt 0 Sq.Ft Pe} Basement & Finished =| N/A - {NA : : N : Rooms Below Grado ___| N/A NIA : : Functional Ut AVERAGE AVERAGE : | Heangtootm | CENTRALA/C _[CENTRALA/C __: Eneny Effictent Rems _ | STD INSULATION | STD INSULATION! | Gerar/Campott 2CAR GARAGE _! Bad Pech Pa, Deck COVENT PORC ! sce NOFE fra Fence, Pool, etc. NO FENCE STDKITEQT : __#3,000 Net Adi, (rota) pitts 5,600 Adiusted Sales Price r of Comparable RAMS aN 190,600 |} Dae, Pree andDzta | PRIOR TO THIS {| PRIOR TO ABOVE SALE Source for prtor sales | LAST SOLD 11/9:| NO SALE RECORD WITHIN thn year of appraisal | CQ 181,000. PAST 12 MONTHS. Comments) THIS 4TH COMPARABLE IS FROM THE SUBJECTS IMMEDIATE SUBDIVISION. COMMENTS FSR Pe Market Data Analysis 6-$3 Oo Form UA2.(AC) — "TOTAL 2000 for Windows" appraisal scftwa'e by a fa mode, inc. — 1-8C0-ALAMO0E 5 / ~~ ) Tv i 2. = 32 ti Subject Photo Page Borower‘Cinnt_-McCOY 7 _. _ Property Astiess 1977 NW 100TH WAY _ Cty PEMBROKE PINES County BROWARD Lender MORTGAGE CAPITAL OF AMERICA a Ty Coe 33024 Subject Front 1977 NW 100TH WAY Saks Pice 215,000 GLA 02,743 Total Rucms 9 Tota Bedims 4 Tota Bans 3.5 Locaden SUBURBAN/IAVG View AVGIGD RESID Ste 5,700 SQFT Quality CBSIAVERAGE 1989(1) Subjéct Rear \ Subject Street Farm BARS. — TOTAL 2900 far Windeiwe! anntsical cevfhuata her a Ip randa ine — rename SIS eererertit LAINT or EXHIBIT Comparable Paoto Page County BROWARD __ Th, ne _33024 Comparahic 1 2031 NW 99TH TERR Pioximty NEXT DEVELOPME Sale Pike. 204,500 2,400 Total Becims 4 Total Battums 2.5 Location SUBURANIAVG. View AVGIGD RESID Site SIMILAR =/- Quaity CBSIAVG Age 2000(NEW) Comparable 2 43026 NW 14TH STREET Proximity = 4 4/2 MILES SOU Sade Pice 239,900 GLA 2,647 ota Rooms 10 Tota Bedims 5 Total Bahims 3.5 Locaton SUBURBAN/AVG View AVGIGD RESID She 6,800 SQFT Quality CBSIAVG Age 4999(1) Comparable 3 1877 NW 127TH AVE Prosmty 1: 172 MILES SO Sale Price 216,500 GA 2,430 Teal Rooms 9 Tod Bedims 4 ‘Tota Battims 2.5 leaion - SUBUR@AN/AY View AVGIGD RESI Ste 8,398 SQFT Orality CBSIAVG Age 1998(2) Farm BINA RR «TATAL 9000 for Winetnge? anncsical coftuare hy ata made ine — 1800.81 BMONE sl *"pjat Map [BomiweyCiett_ McCOY Property Adcress_ 1077 NW 100TH WAY. -——— City__ PEMBROKE PINES Courty BROWARD. Tptede 33024 Lendet MORTGAGE CAPITAL OF AMERICA RAINEOW U42-17) rs LAKES (77-28) BAYBERRY LAKE IN| PEMBROKE ECL. “10° DOWERMAN PLAT (180-109 i \ i y YH ‘sv oo Wrvew ree rs 17 MBROKE PINES) westview | (2745) Lr songs wan {mse ore @ PEMB i/ nas conool>t/ | °F 5 Be2k I ie = ATHlgf bss A || “6. = - ee — eat eaBE Gh hesrven yf wesrgen Py = : weit ito cee Cy ; i TOVPIIDUSES CECLN 709" & f TH2 { f \ | Se \ / wesw Ba} COO Tae. rere ti + ene wen Form MAP PLAT — ‘TOTAL 2000 for Windows® appraisal saftwarn by ala mod, Inc. —- 1-800-ALAMOCE She eevee Buliding Sketch BoroweyCint MoCOY Property Ackkess_1077 NW 100TH WAY Cty PEMBROKE PINES County BROWARD. Stde_ FL Zip Code 33024 tender MORTGAGE CAPITAL OF AMERICA SKETCH CALCULATIONS Uving Aran First Floor At:370x270% A2Z:34.0x7.08 Second Floor AZ:37Lx27.08 44:22.0x240= Total Living Area Garage Area Detached Garage #5: 22.0 x20.0™ Total Garage Area ‘ S) Form SKT.BLDSKI —— ‘TOTAL 2000 for Windows® appraisal software by a fa mode, inc, ~ 1-800-ALAMODE S la ( <4 stood Map BoruweyClent McCOY [Property Adress 1977 NW 400TH WAY’ Cty PEMBROKE PINES ~ County BROWARD State FL TmCoe 33024 [Lender MORTGAGE CAPITAL OF AMERICA 1977 Nv 100TH WAY HOLLYWOOD, FL 330241 462 Special Flood Hazard Areas | inate SFHA Dounise SFA Beton EN oA Coppngnn® 1953 Ly Tranvamenca intalinacr. At aghs ros atved. Flood innstes iso registered Farce ack of Tranvamatcn intaliaech Mazi Macn®, end Mop Mara are proprivtayy. regiviared Vadenarts cttles = Corporsicn Troy Hie be Uneed Stags and ore hcwneed 0 Teensemenca laeica ch by Mops Latitude: 26.024600 Longitude: -80.279600 Zone Dota for 1977 NW 100TH WAY HOLLYWOOD, FL 33024-1462 COMMUNITY COMMUNITY NAME ZONE PANEL PANEL DATE 20053 PEMBROKE PINES. CITY OF AH 0305F 08/18/32 A Form BSP Ficed ~ ‘TOTAL 2000 for Windows® appraisal software by a fa mode, inc. — 1-800-ALAMODE / Location Map eeiguin AN 49 PL - 3 : 3 8 -) ~ - w " # . s ae 3 aD in Ra 8 2 7) rr | Py ; SANUDO SO z | ESTATES O pene] g 2 Jao s stu PAI ; ge OE Send | TR a < f EOGEHNL LA WS lo ‘ i* a g i=4 a a | = > i | Oliye Hicko ts i | ene” g ( E3 4 ' E Po 2 = F4 Ve urAL'2d County BROWARD _ NMERICA, \ >! 5 ie a 3) fu Charles\> : Fal S _2ls Fairway Elle ses wee igre ASS! 0 © EAST BS EAA >| Zlz' Saeeton RKPLACKE. Slelaly 2 SS aR RNAS Sei) 3 . =a) Oo age Le} Blo! | 8] S19 Pel ores S| 3)5/3 - FS segs * omen fe D¢/14 337 One Source Property Valuation, Inc: Appraisers & Consultants AV129667-2 Fila No, 20010205 REVIEW OF Single Family Dweliing LOCATED AT: 1977 NW 100th Way Pemibroke Pines, FL, 33024 FOR: Fannie Mae NUC / PFR/ NASCO 380 Southpointe Blvd. STE-300 Canonsburg, PA 15317 BORROWER: McCoy, Dawn AS OF: 07/15/2001 BY: Jason E. Manzo <==) “fla tatlonwiaa , Natlonyige Arareizal Services Cong | Canonsbursy, PA (820) 920.0656 P.O. Box 17495, Plantation, FL 33318 (954)-321-5577 One Source Property Valuation, Inc. Appraisers & Consultants AV129667-2 Fila No. 20010205 7/15/2001 Fannie Mae NUC / PFR/ NASCO 380 Southpointe Blvd. STE-300 oy Canonsburg, PA 15317 File Number: 20010205 Dear Sir / Madam, _ tn accordance with your request, | have completed a Field Review for the following appraisal teport: Address: 1977 NW 100th Way Pembroke Pines, FL, 33024 Appratsed Date: 07/15/2001 Appraiser: Jason E. Manzo Supervisory Appralser: The purpose of this Field Review is to determine if the report has been prepared in conformance with acceptable appraisal guidelines and techniques and utilized appropriate data in arriving at the value conclusions. Tho reviewer has not been asked to arrive at a value conclusion, nor is any opinion of value rendered in connection with this review. i The attached review report contains the comments and conclusions of the reviewer, along with certain certifications and limiting conditions. Respectfully Submitted, &. Manz6 St.Cert.Res.REA #RD0003214 P.O. Box 17495, Plantation, FL 33318 (054)-321-6577 2S. oa v Le. PAGE __ Limited Restricted Appraisal Repost AV129867-2 Residential Appraisal Field Review Report Fin tla 20010205 Tho purpose of this review is fo determina tho complotonoss and accuracy of the data in an appraisal roport and to varity tha accuracy of the markot vaio | ostimate ag of tho effactive data c? the original appraisal. Tha appraisal review must addross all (actual, judgmanlal, and appraisal tectinique discropay This field raviow is 2 spot-chack on the criginal aporaisal report as part af a mortgage qualily review. It ls nol intended to be used as @ naw appraisal. ( altach a copy of the original appraisal rapart lo this report.) Proporty Address 1977 NW 100th Way City Pembroke Pines Stato FL. Zin Code 33024 Logal Description See Attached Addendum. Property Rights Appraised Fee Simple Clignt Reference Number 1674714337 [Ettactive Date of Orloinal AopralsaLand Field Review Appraised: 5/8/00 __ Reviewed: _7/1501 Borrowor McCoy, Dawn Roviow Agpraiser Jason E. Manzo Company Name One Source Property Valuation, Inc. * _ Address P.O. Box 17495 Plantation, FL 33318 _ Teleshone Number (954)-321-5577 Soc, See, of Tax 10. Number 65-08 75344 insteuctions: The review appraiser must personally inspect (by, at least, driving by) the extaricr of the subject property and the comparablos the analysis. Photographs ate required for: tha front of the comparables, the front of the subject; and a streal scene of the subjoct proparty Aeai photographs ara suggested if any adverse conditions that werg not noted In tho original appraisal report are observed. (NOTE: Tha rovlew appraisar Is not required to Inspact the interior of the subject proparty. The review appraisar should verily the data in the original appraisal feport, usitg tho assessmant records, the real estate broker, of any other data source that ha or she considars fo be reliable and reasonably available.) Based on the Sxterior inspaction of the subject and the comparables, a thorough desk review of the appraisal report, and a review of the ralavant markat data for the subject market aroa, raspond to the following quostions, form an opinion about the agprapriataness of the appraisal methods end techniques that wera used, and Indicate any areas of disagreamant (giving faasons for the differences). OS aot timit your responses to the space provided, aitach an addendum, If nacessary: 1. Provide a sales and refinance history for the subject property for the last threo years (if it Is reasonably available from a data source that the review appralsar considers {o bs reliable.) Conveyance Salas Prica ‘Asking Price | Mortgage Amount GrantcriGrantee Data Sources Recordation Date 6/00 : 215,000 Unknown 204,000| Wilson, Christopher / McCoy, Dawn §SCNet/ Public Records | 44/99 | 181,000 176,900 Unknown] Unknown _/ Wilson, Christopher ASCNel/ MLS | 2. 1s the appraiser's overall description of the neighborhood complete and accurate (location, genera! market conditions [i.e., plant fallures, etc.}, property values, demand/supply, marketing time, general appearance of properties, appaal to market, etc.)? Yos (Ito, explain.) Appralser did not Indicate the proper legal description for ihe subject. Appraiser had the current folio number to the property and a purchase contract. This information should have been accessible. Appraiser also indicates the census tract for the subject with the zoning classification of the subject development. The proper census for the subject is 1103.000. The subject is located Jin'a neighborhood of similar style dwellings within close proximity to all market preferred amenitics. closings, crop — 3, le the appralser’s overail description of the sits comp! and accurate (zoning compliance, apparent adverse conditions, apparent environmentat hazards, size, flood hazard, etc.)? (_}Yes {X] No (ifno, explain.) The appraisers overall description of the site appears __| complete and accurate, However according lo the legal description of the subject, the subject site is 51.40 X 91.40 or 4698 S.F. The appraiser also indicates the wrong FEMA flood map number The correct flood map number is 12011C0305 F. The subject site is of | typical size, shape and topography for the area. No apparent easements or encroachments were noted 4. ts the eppraiser's ovoreli description of the improvements complete and accurate (property description, depreciation, condition, apparent environmental hazards, etc.)? Yes lo (If no, explain yThe appraiser's overall description of the improvements appears complete and accurate, however review appraiser notes the subject to be within a gated development. At time of review inspection review appraiser was unable to enter the development to visually inspect any of the properties. It is also noted that the appraiser notes a HOA fee of $55.00 per month and then states the subject is not within a PUD development with no common recreational elements. The subject development is in fact a PUD development with a card gate entry, and community pool. } 5. Aro tho design and appeal, quallly of construction, and size of the subject similar to others In this area? (\XJ¥es LJNo | (if no, how is the subject different?) The design, appeal, and quality of construction of the subject is similar to other homes within the area, The subject is a two story style dwelling which appears to be similar to other homes within the neighborhood = 6. Ave the comparables usad in the analysis truly comparatia to the subject properly, fepresentative of the subject market, and were they the best ones available as of the effective date of the appraisal? Yes No (If'no, explain and provide an adjustment grid with the appropriate com- parabies and adjustments on an addendum.) Allcomparable sales employed were from outside the subject development. Sales #2 and #3 were calculated to be nearly 3 miles west of the subject development. Sales at time of original appraisal were available from within the subject development, and noted within this report. 7, (a) Can the date of sale (contract date and/or closing/settisment date), sates price, and sates or financing cgncessions for the comparablas be confirmed through the data source that tho appraiser indicated? —_(X] Yes No (ifno, explain.) Sale dates, prices, and financing for the comparable sales can be confirmed through ISCNet / Public Records. (b) Wore the comparables actual closad of seitiad sales as of the effeclive date of the origina! appraisal? yes (J tio (it no, exstsin.) All comparable sales appeared to be closed and/or seltled as of the effective date of the original appraisal. Data verified through ISCNet / Public Records. Itis noted that sa'e /'2 according to MLS and as recorded in ISC/Public Records was purchased for, $235,000. Frade Mae Foss $902 150 Page 1 of 2 Faoele Bac Fan 00 180 1a Faray Properties Tru tsm ens pend on Pe NI Dniyet Paph me api (8) ATI ta Fay roped bot es Limited Restricted Appraisal Report AV129667-2 Residential Appraisal Field Review Report Fig No, 20010205 @ Is the spucltic data for (the comparables accurate (lime, location, design and appoal, quality of construction, ago, condition, size, sales of financing concessions, otc)? (_J¥es {%} No (ino, explain.) Mis noted thaLthe sales utilized.svore within gated developments. Review _____ appraiser was only able to enter ihe community forsale #1, All data was verified fram MLS listing information on the sales. Review __ appraiser was unable.to_confim the GLA and room count fecsale #41, and assumes this to be verified by.anpraiser. and correct, Sale... #2 had a sale price of $236,000. and had 3 full baths. Sates #2 and #3 were also calculated by review appraiser to be nearly 3 miles _ | west of the subject. Sale #4 was noted as being focated on a lake, and the same model as the subject with the same GLA, 9. Ase the individual adjustmonts to the comparables ressonable and supported {tima, tocation, design and appeal, quality of construction, age, condi: lion, size, sales or financing concessions, etc.)? X] Yes [J No (lino, explain.) Adjustments applied to the comparable sales appear to_ be reasonable and supporled. 40. {the subject property Is a small residential income proparty (2-4 unit) ct a single-family investment properly, are (he comparable rental and expense data accurate and reasonable? Oves [Jno [X)NA (If no, explain.) N/A 41. If the subject property Is an Individual unit In a condomlalum or PUD project, Ia the project description complete and accurate? Ces No (JNA (tno, explain.) All projact information was incomplete and inaccurate 12, Is the estimate of market value for the subject properly reasonabdla as of the effective date of the appralsal? O Yes Ko (ifno, provide an appropriate estimate of markat value for the subjoct property and state the assumptions [exterior Inspection only, proparty dascription and condition, etc.) that the opinion fs subject to.) The estimate of market value for the subject property at $215,000 appears high as of the effective date of the appraisal based on an exterior "Drive-By" inspection of the subject and sales only. A more Appropriate estimate of market value based on market grid supplied would be $180,000 : Note: This review does not represent an appraisal of the subject property. The opinions and statements set forth herein have been based on review of the appraisal and a "Drive-By" exterior inspection of the subject, comparable sales, and the neighborhood. Cn et 13, Has there been a substantlat change in the base economy In the area since the effective date of the appralsal? oO Yes ) please explain.) There has been no substantial change in the base economy within the subject's market area since the effective date of the originat appraisal. 14, Wthe subject properly Is a cooperative unlt, the review appraiser must address the completeness and accuracy ol the original appraiser's description and analysis of the cooparative projact and specifically comment on the accuracy of: (2) the number of shares attributable to the unit; (b) the pro-rata share of the blanket mortgage payments; and (c) the treatment of the monthly assessments of the comparable sales. N/A 1 eertily thal, to the best of my knowledge and belist the facts and dala used herein are true and correct, that | personally inspected ta exterior of the subject property and the comparables used in the report, that the reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions ara limited only by tie reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions, thal | have no present or prospactive interest in the propatiy that is tha subject of this report, and | havs no parsongyn:: ist in or bias with the respect to the parties involved, that my compe rsation is not coringant on any action of event resulting trom (he analys2segT pesisions in, of the use of, this report, and tha! mpanalyses, a07.098, aad conslusions were developed, and this report was et erareg Ymity with the Unitorm Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice Cate 07/15/2001 Ravlow Undanwiter's Commonts Signature of Review Underwriter pe Freddie Mac Form (032 40 Page 2 of 2 Farsde Mos Farm 2000 1290, 1-4 Family Prepates Ton Kam was protec 2 Fa Al Devore RaphsFares aja (208) DTT 1-4 Fardy Proparten Natlonwide Appraisal Sorvices Corp. ae Supptemontal Valuation Soctlon Limited Res&icted Appraisal Repo! Single Family Supplemental Data AV129667-2 Fila No. 20010205 rs TEM SUBJECT COMPARABLE HO. 1 { COMPARABLE NO. 2 COMPARABLENO. 3 9 1977 NW 100th Way F953 Nw 100th Avenue 9658 NW 18th Street “19913 NW 20th Street Astoss Pembroke Pines, FL. Pembroke Pines, FL Pembroke Pines, FL Pembroke Pines, FL. Proximity to Sublost wea 4 Block East 1 Block South 1 Block North £1 Solas Prica A 245,000 yeas 67,000 |" et s 165,000 weld’ $s 485,000; Prioa/Gross Uv. Area |$ 0.00/$ 91.81 gees S$ 69,77 * : Is 67.44%: Data andi Ext. Insp / Apprst Exterior inspection Exterior Inspection Exterior Inspection 2 l Ba i ba Vorificgtion Sources |ISC/Pub Records |ISCNet/ Public Records /MLS ___||SCNet/ Public Records / MLS. ISCNet / Public Records / MLS PA VALLEADLSTLENTS| — CESCRIPTION QESCRIPTION PAhatret DESCRIPTION +) bare CESCRIPTION Pb AL arneet ez Salas or Finandng =~ | None Conventional ! No Adj | Conventional . No Adj | Conventional ‘ No ‘Adj [34 Concessions Noted : : i # Cate of Satastima | §/00 Orig Inspect. } 4/00 Closed t No Adj | 8/99 Closed : No Adj | 7/99 Closed No Adi | fej Location Interior / Avg Interior / Avg t Interior / Avg H Interior / Avg H | is Leacitoisfee Smpa_| Fee Simple Fee Simple : Fee Simple ‘ |Fee Simple : | 1G Site 4698 Sq. Ft 5135 Sq. Ft. t No Adj | 5726 Sq. Ft ‘ No Adj 15726 Sq. Ft. No Adj. | i View Residential /Avq | Residential /Ava Canal / Avg H +2,500 |Lake/Average + -5 900,” | if Design and Appeal_| 2 Story / Avg 2 Story / Avg ‘ 2 Story / Avg ‘ 12 Story / Avg : QalydCorsucin =| CBS / Avg CBS / Avg _ ‘ CBS / Avg : CBS / Avg ‘ Re Age 1999 1997 H No Adj | 1599. H 1997 t No Adj ; Condition Average Average ‘ Average : Average : | Above Grade Ta! Gamat atu [Taw Gru) Bone! Tau ieam | be! Tau! eamy | bast i Room Count * a & 3.5| 7 3: 2.5! +3,000 | 8 3k 25: 43,000 | 8 4: 3.5¢ | Gross Living Area 2,743 SqFt 1,819 SqFi._' +13,900 2,365 SoFt.* +5,700. 2,743 SqFt. t o| Basemont & Faished | None None : None : None : | Rooms Below Grade_| Noted Noted : Noted : Noted in Functional Utility Average Average ‘ Average : Average : ig Hoating/Cooling Central Central t Central : Central H Energy Effdont tems_| Standard Standard iH Standard H Standard i H 3 Garage/Carport 2 Car Garage 2 Car Garage ‘ 2 Car Garage : 2 Car Garage : Porch, Patio, Deck, | Entry Porch Entry Porch ‘ Entry Porch : Entry Porch . : Ey Firoplace(s), atc. | Open Patio Open Patio i Open Patio : Open Patio A is Fonce, Pool, etc. _| None Noted Fence H No Adj | None Noted : None Noted H ie Std. Appliance Std. Appliance t Std. Appliance + Std. Appliance Fi Hat Ady, otal aa aeaaNi| | Xie 6.00 FX s 6,200 fey Adjusted Sales Prica Gross: 7 . iA of Comparable 183,900 | Net: 471,200 | Not: -2.7%'E"" $ 180,000 Comparison {Including is Commenta on Sales the weet property's compatibility to the nelghborhood, ate. ): fe Ey ba BS Ea ITEM SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO. 3 "2 Cato, Price and Data | 11/99 297 No Prior Sale information 12/97 Px Source for prior sales | $181,000 $147,500 New Construction $177,900 ie within yacr of appraisal [1SC/Pub Records | !SCNet / Public Records ISCNet / Public Records (SCNet/ Public Records. if Analysis of any current agreement of sala, option, or listing of the subject propaty and analysis of any prior sales of subjact and comparables withln one yaar of the date of appraisal. : See Attached Addendum. { Yea Gm ans ORGAO Fa Kiln rn Raa en SO ETTTT ighae SUSJECT PROPERT ¥ PHOTO ADDENDUM Borrower: McCoy, Dawn Fite No. 20010205 Proparty Address: 1977 NW 100th Way Case No.: AV129667-2 City: Pembroke Pines State: FL Zip, 33024 Lender: FRONT VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY | Appraised Vaiue: $ REAR VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY \ STREET SCENE COMPLAINT. 7) ISTRATIV 3 < 1 Tf enews om ca = Pas ul 23 . ORIGINAL COMPARABLES PHOTO ADDENDUM Borrower: McCoy, Dawn ~ File No.:_ 20010205 Property Address: 1977 NW 100th Way Case No. AV129667-2 City: Pembroke Pines State: Fl Zip: 33024 ~ Lender: COMPARABLE SALE #1 2031 NW 99th Terrace Pembroke Pines, FL Sale Date: 2/00 COMPARABLE SALE #3 13026 NW 14th Street Pembroke Pines, FL Sale Date; 3/00 Sale Price: $ 235,000 COMPARABLE SALE #3-- 1877 NW 127th Avenue Pembroke Pines, FL Sale Date: 3/00 Sale Price: $ 216,500 Sale Price: $ 204,500 & ( Woo . ORIGINAL COMPARABLES PHOTO ADDENDUM Borrower, McCoy Dawn . FileNo. 20010205 Property Address. 1977 NW 10014 Way Case No. AV129667-2 Cay: Pembroke Pines State: FL Zip. 33024 Lender COMPARABLE SALE #4 $913 NW 20th Street Pembroke Pines, FL Sale Date: 7/99 Sale Price: $ 185,000 COMPARABLE SALE #3 Sale Date: Sale Price: $ COMPARABLE SALE #6 ~. Sale Date: Sale Price: $ 7 fe EXHIBIT dé SUPPLEMENTAL SALES PHOTO ADDENDUM Borrower: McCoy, Dawn File No.2 20010205 Property Address: 1977 NW 100th Way Case No.: AV129667-2 City: Pembroke Pines State: FL Zip: 33024 Lender: COMPARABLE SALE #1 1953 NW 100th Avenue Pembroke Pines, Fl. Sale Date: 4/00 Closed > Sale Price: $ 167,000 e Nye? (HY ot a” COMPARABLE SALE #2 9858 NW 18th Street Pembroke Pines, FL Sale Date: 8/99 Closed Sale Price: $ 165,000 COMPARABLE SALE #3 . 9913 NW 20th Street Pembroke Pines, FL. Sale Date: 7/99 Closed Sale Price: $ 185,000 pmanmeean nen at tert ps ADDENDUM Borrower: McCoy, Dawn _ Fila No: 20010205 Z Property Address: 1977 NW 100th _ Case No: AVI29667.2 _ City: Pembroke Pines Stato: FL Zip: 33024 Lender. Comments on Sales Comparison All sates selected are from the same market area as the subject and are all considered to be good indicators of value, Sales were selected based on style, GLA, site, and overall tocation. Adjustments were made for view, baths, and GLA. All sales utilized were considered in the final value estimate, however most emphasis was placed on sale #3 due {o the overall similarity to the subject and requiring the least gross and net adjustments, and sale #1 due to being the most recent sale within the subject development. Ail sales were simitar to the subject in most major areas of comparison including size, features, and location. The appraiser discovered severat sales within the subject area, however the sales utilized are in the appralser's opinion the most quantitative and qualitative market data available for enalysis within the immediate area and Nelghborhood of the subject property. To the best of the apprafser’s knowledge, all sales utillzed herein are closed sales, Oata can be verified through sources indicated. % Addandum Pagas of 1 blo i ca = “ id tu or < fans ADDENDUM Borrower: McCoy, Dawn _ File No.: 20010205, Property Address: 1977 NW 100in Way. Casa No: AV. City: Pembroke Pines State: FL . Zip:_ 33024 Lender: Addendum To Appraisal FHMA/ FHLMC Underwtiting Guidelines This addendum is an integra! portion of the attached appraisal and has been submitted in order to assist the reader and aid the appraiser in compliance with typically accepted guidelines. The appraiser has been requested to perform a review appraisal and drive by the subject dwelling and the comparable sales utilized within the original appraisal supplied and not to disturb the occupants of the home by entering the dwelling. The physical characteristics used to develop this review teport are based on the appraisal supplied, assessment records of this county, and the documentation supplied to the review appraiser by various data sources, l.e., ISCNet / Public Records, MLS (Multipte Listing Service), etc. The subject property was observed from the street as of the effective date of the original appraisal based on observed conditions, assessment records, and other data sources cited. The physical characteristics of the subject appear to be accurate, For the purpose of this review report it is assumed that the interior condition and materials is as stated within the original appraisal. Conditions of Review To the best of our knowledge and belief, the data utilized in this report is true and correct, and the analysis, opinions and conclusions were developed and prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) adopted by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation. Legal Description Dowerman Plat 160-10 B POR TR A DESC AS COMM SE COR TR A, W 660.29,W 200.90,W 82.25,N 508.69 TO POB,W 91.40,N 51.40,E 91.40,S 51.40 TO POB \ AKA: Lot 62 Normandy at Pembroke Pines Addendum Pagel of 1 AV129667-2 File No. 20010205 DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE: The most probable price which a property should tring In a compatitiva and open mackel under all Conditlona requisite to a falr sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowlsdgoably and assuming the price Is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicil In this definition Is the consummation of a saie as of a speciflad date and the passing of litle from safler to buyer under conditions whereby: (1) buyer and setler are typically motivated: {2) both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what he considors his own dest interest; (3) a reasonabia time is allowad for exposure In the open market; (4) payment Is made In terms of cash In U.S. dotlars or In terms of financial arrangemonts comparable therelo: and (5) the price represents the normal consideration fer the properly sold unaffected by spocia! or creative financing ot sales concessions* granted by anyone associated with the sats. SCOPE OF REVIEW: The scope of this raviow Is limited to the Information being provided by the original appratser; form an opinion as to the apparent adequacy and relevance of the data and the propriety of any adjustments to the data; form an oplnion as to the appropriateness Of tho appraisal mathods and techniquos used and dovolop the reasons for any disagreement; form an opinion as to whether the analyses, opinions, and conclusions In the report under review ara appropriate and roasonablo, and develop the reasons for any disagroament. CERTIFICATION AND STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS: CERTIFICATION: The Roviewer cortifies and agrees that, to the best of his/her knowledge and boliot: 1. The facts and data reported by the Reviewer and used In the review procoss are true and colrect. ne 2. The analyses, opinions, and conclusions in thls review report ata limited only by the assumpllons and Ilmiting conditions stated In this revlaw report, and are my personal, unblasad profasslonal analyses, oplalons, and conclusions. 4. Unless stated etsewhors, 1 have no present or prospective Interest in the property that is the subject of this report and | have no personal interest or blas with respect to the parties involved. 4. My compensation [s not contingent en an action or event resulting from the analyses, opinions, or conclusions in, or the use of, this teview report. 5. My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this review report was propared In conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appralsal Practica, 6. Untess stated olsewhore tn this report, | did personally inspect the subject proparty. ~ 7. No one provided significant professional assistance 1o the parson signing this teviaw report. CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: The certification of the Reviewer appearing In the review report is subject tothe fotiowlng conditions and to such other specific and limiting conditions as ara sot forth by the Reviewar In the raview report, 1. The Ravlower assumes no responsibility for matters of a legal nature affecting the property which Is the subject of this review or the title thereto, nor does the Reviewer render any opinions as to the tille, which ts assumed to be good and marketable. 2, The Reviewer ts not required to give testimony or appear in court because of having made the reviow, unless arrangements have been previously made therefor 3. The Reviewor assumes that there are no hidden or Unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures, which would render It mora or less valuable. The Reviewer assumes no responsibility for such conditions, or for engineering which might be required to discover such factors. , 4, Information, estimates, and opinions furnished to the Reviewer, and contained In the review report, were oblained from sources Considered reliable and believed to be true end correct. However, no responsibilty for accuracy of such items furnishod the Reviewsr can be assumed by the Reviewer. 5. Olsclosura of the contents of the report is governed by the Unlform Standards of Professional Appralsa! Practice and the Bylaws and Regulations of the professlonal appralsa! organizations with which the Reviewer Is affiliated. §, Neither all, nor any part of the content of ihe review report, or copy thereof (Including the conclusions of the raview, the identity of tha Reviewar, professional designations, reference to any professtonal appraisal organizations, or the firm with which the Reviewer Is connected), shall be used for any purposes by anyone but the client specified in the review raport, Its successors and assigns, profassional appraisal organizations, any state or federa!ly approved financlal institution, any department, agency, or lastrumentality of the United States or any state or the District of Columbia, without the previous written consent and approval of the Reviewer. 7. No change of any Item in the review report shall be made by anyone other Ihan the Reviewer and the Reviewer shall have no responsibilty for any such unauthorized change. REVIEWER: Signature Name Jason Date Report State Cortifcatiga ¥ RD0003211 State FL Or State License # State St. Cert. Res. REA #RDO003211 (13S Campbell & Associates, Appraisal 10810 NW 20 St — Pembroke Pines, FL Ph: (954) 450-7007 — Fax 450-7009 March 7, 2002 Dennis Thresher Dept of Professional Regulation Bureau of Enforcement 5080 Coconut Creek Pkwy Ste A Margate, FL 33063-3942 Re: DBPR Case Number 2001-50156 _ BQ Dear Mr. Thresher: mn ( . 2. I am in receipt of your package, and am at a loss as to why I have no record of previous correspondence in this matter. From the date of your letter, I was out of town when it arrived, and apologize for my office apparently having lost it. x 1 am enclosing the contents of our file, along with this response to the review appraisal. Item #2: The legal description, as noted, was incomplete. That was evidently on an addendum page, omitted from the appraisal, as provided to the reviewer. This should have been referenced on pg 1, “See Addendum”. The census tract space does contain the zoning code, instead. These were oversights by the appraiser, and my further error/omission in review. The proper census tract is 1103, as stated in review. Item #3: The appraiser took the lot size from public records and MLS data. Those noted 5,700 sq ft and she evidently assumed 100 ft depth. This was incorrect, but the proportions of the lot are conforming & typical for the market & subdivision. In review, I did not calculate the lot size from the legal description. This is a common type of error, not to excuse such errors in any way. Very seldom is an appraiser called upon to calculate lot’size from metes and bounds, in recent years. : The flood map number was evidently misstated on pg one; however, the correct panel, with number, was included in the appraisal. This is clerical in nature, and in review, I now see I need to pay more attention to these details and their consistency. The flood zone is correctly stated, with flood insurance required. Item #4: The Subject is in a gated community, with pool, and the appraiser omitted description of common elements. This is obviously not meant to be misleading. If the comparables were gated, and the Subject was: Not, there might be value issues, but not in this case. I did not do the inspection, and didn’t ask about the gate or see the inconsistency, as I obviously didn’t see the HOA fee. Item #6: Reviewer did not mention our sale #4, Inside the development, nor sale #1 in the immediate next development, the Subject’s direct competition. The comparables were chosen by the appraiser, and seemed to represent alternative market choices in the area. When appraisers are asked to do review appraisals, especially with benefit of hindsight (FNMA’s name would seem to raise red flags) those appraisals are typically quite conservative. In any residential market, there will be financial duress, divorces, and other factors that cause low- end sales. The reviewer did not enter the subdivision, and therefore I would assume, exercised extreme caution. One would expect such an appraisal to make use of the lowest sales. The review wasfal&cOdone Byer a year after our appraisal. a MAR 0 8 Z002 t DIVISION OF KeALESiare Lf! 54 Item #7(b): Our back-up (research records) indicates this sale amount was mis-typed (I believe the Listed price was $239,900 & it sold at $235,000) Unknown cause of error, except typo. Again, regrettable, but the difference would not cause the sale to be inappropriate, nor a large difference in estimated market value. Item #8: We had noted Sale #2 with 3.5 baths. The lack of % bath would cause a slight upward adjustment.’ Our records don’t show source of appraiser's 3.5 baths and it’s been long enough. we don’t remember. Distance to sales #2 & #3 is regrettable. However, the appraiser couldn’t enter Embassy Lakes, which is the 2™ closest gated community comparable to the Subject’s. Homes there are older, but it’s close & similar. Therefore, she went to Pembroke Falls, newer homes, still under construction, very similar, also gated. She could enter there, due to ongoing sales/construction. Item #12: The reviewer’s estimate of market value is with benefit of hindsight, and without benefit of inspection, or even seeing any of his comparable sales, from outside. Therefore, I refer to item #6 above. Item #13: In my opinion, there had been a change in the market from the time of the appraisal to the time of the review. It had gone ‘soft’, and homes were taking longer to sell, by the end of 2000. In 2001, we experienced a boom, that continued after the country recovered from 9/11, and were in the middle of that when the review was done. I believe this answers the questions raised in the review. Please contact me with any other questions you might have. We did not intend to mislead anyone, nor do the errors addressed here, considered in the aggregate, tend to mislead. , a] a - f . PD Ce (S¢ G Si Gat Kes F CH: STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION 2, o FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD ©, “ . rn ; ; : re Final Order No. BPR-2002-01016 Date: <_ Ce DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND FILED Bal64 tm 3 : Department of Business and Professional Regulation” ~-~ PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, AGENCY CLERK ae DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE Petitioner vs. DOREEN H. CAMPBELL, Respondent Sarah Wachman, Agency 7) , ov e yy By: ln ar dar) ] B CASE NO. 9984831 ORDER On February 5, 2002, the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board heard this case upon the Respondent’s oral motion to vacate the previous Final Order and allow the parties to be heard upon a Stipulation. Respondent was properly served with the Notice of Hearing and appeared. After completely reviewing the record and being otherwise fully advised, the Board ORDERS that Respondent’s request be GRANTED and the previous Final Order be vacated and the case be heard upon Stipulation. Pursuant to Sections 120.569 and 120.57(4) of the Florida Statutes, the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board heard this case upon a Stipulation. After considering this Stipulation and being fully advised on the premises, the Board ORDERS the adoption of the agreement. A copy of this Stipulation is attached hereto as Exhibit .. A and made a part hereof. DONE AND ORDERED this 5" day of February, 2002, in Orlando, Florida. Division of Real Estate. net ie sren ise EXHIEST PAGE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE _. [HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoing was sent by U.S. Certified Mail to: ‘Barry A. Postman, Esquire, COLE SCOTT & KISSANE P A, Pacific National Bank Bldg., Third Floor, 1390 Brickell Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131; and a copy provided to Stacy N. Robinson | Qs Pierce, Esquire, DBPR, Post Office Box 1900, Orlando, Florida 32802-1900, this AP day of Moreh 2002, ‘ oes STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL nfepration> » “/ FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD ~/ y “ . ‘4 . . . 7. és -FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, ts DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE, Petitioner, Vv. DBPR Case No. 99-84831 DOREEN H. CAMPBELL, Respondent. STIPULATION Respondent and the Petitioner, Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate, hereby stipulate and agree to the issuance of a Final Order by the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board, adopting and incorporating the provisions of this supulation in reference to the above styled case. . STIPULATED FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Respondent is now and was at all times pertinent herein a Florida State Centfied Residential Real Estate Appraiser, and the holder of license number RD00C1596. The last license issued was as a state certified residential real estate appraiser at 10810 NW 20" Street, Pembroke Pines, Florida 33026. 2. Respondent admits that she is subject to the provisions of Chapter 455 and 475, Florida Statutes, and therefore, subject to the jurisdiction of the Department and the Flonda Real Estate Appraisal Board. 3. Respondent admits that she has been served with the Administrative Complaint, copy Psa, FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell _DBPR Case No. 99-§4831 Stipulation attached, which charges the Respondent with having violated certain provisions of Chapter 475, Florida Statutes. 4. Respondent admits the factual allegations contained in the Administrative Complaint and that such allegations constitute a violation(s) of the couni(s) charged. 5. Respondent shall not in the future violate Chapters 455 or 475 Florida Statutes, nor the rules promulgated thereto. STIPULATED DISPOSITION 6. Respondent shall pay an administrative fine of $2,000. The fine shall be made payable by checks to the Florida Department of Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate within eighteen (18) months from the date of the filing of the Final Order. If the fine is not timely paid, then all of Respondent's licenses, registrations, certifications, and permits issued by the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board to the Resporident shall be suspended until the fine is paid in full, the period not to exceed ten (10) years. 7, Respondent shall be placed on suspension for a period of thirty (30) days from the. date of filing of the Final Order. Reinstatement requires submission of proper forms, which may include Form 400.3 and/or Form 400.5. 8. Upon reinstatement of Respondent license, Respondent shall be placed on probation: for a period of eighteen (18) months, during which time Respondent must take the forty-five hour Certified Residential Appraisal AB-II and AB-IIB Board approved appraisal course. The education herein is in addition to any requirement for Respondent to maintain the real estate appraisal license. Failure to complete the course within the time period shall result in the suspension of all the iS) FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell DBPR Case No. 99-84831 Stipulation - Respondent's licenses, registrations, certifications, and permits issued by the Florida Real Estate ; Apptaisal Board until the education is completed, the period not to exceed ten (10) vears. The Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board wi!l consider no requests or petitions for extensions of time to complete the education outlined herein. 9. The FREAB News and Report shall publish the action reflected in the Final Order as follows: Pembroke Pines: Doreen H. Campbell, state certified residential real estate appraiser (RD0001596); 30 davs suspension, fined $2,000, 18 months probation and 45-hr Certified Residential Appraisal ABI and ABB Board approved appraisal course; violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, guilty of having failed to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal report and guilty of culpable negligence or breach of trust ina business transaction. 10. The parties expressly agree that this Stipulation is subject to the approval of the Department and of the Board, and that it has no force and effect until issuance of and filing of a Final : Order. 11. The Respondent executes this Stipulation for the purpose of avoiding further administrative action with respect to this cause. In this regard, the Respondent authorizes the Florida.- Real Estate Appraisal Board to review and examine all investigative file materials concerning the Respondent prior to the consideration of this Stipulation. Furthermore, should this Stipulation be rejected by the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board, the parties agree that presentation to, and consideration of this Stipulation and other documents and matters by the Florida Real Estate 3 EDN a tyne EXE 3 PAGE Bos BG FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell DBPR Case No. 99-84831 Stipulation Appraisal Board shall not unfairly or unlawfully prejudice the Respondent, the Department, the : Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board, or any of its members from further participation, consideration, or resolution of these proceedings, including formal heaning. 12. The parties understand that this Stipulation and resulting Final Order adopting and incorporating its terms shall not preclude any other disciplinary proceedings by the Department or the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board against the Respondent for acts or omissions not specifically set forth in the attached Administrative Complaint or mentioned in the investigative report which predicated it. 13. The Respondent expressly waives all notice requirements and right to seek judicial review of or to otherwise challenge or contest the validity and enforcement of this Stipulation and resulting Final Order of the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board adopting and incorporating this Stipulation. . 14. All parties to this Stipulation shall bear their own attorneys' fees and costs incurred in connection with this cause. 15. Should Respondent withdraw from or in any Way manner cancel, annul, alter, tepudiate, or revoke the terms of this Stipulation prior to presentation or consideration by the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board, Respondent agrees to waive all nghts she may have to seek attorney’s ° fees and costs incurred as the result of the disciplinary proceeding up to and including the date of her withdrawal from the settlement Stipulation or the date of her attempt to alter, change, annul, repudiate, or revoke the terms of this Stipulation. 16. The Department has no record of prior disciplinary action taken _ agains 4 ADWINIS Tit eo oe EXHIBIT = ES pace Go 3p Ay TT LALNT i FDBPR y. Doreen H. Campbell DBPR Case No. 99-S4834 Stipulation . Respondent. EXECUTED this J 7 dayof_£a@ 2002. Doreen H. Campbell Respondent BEFORE ME personally appeared oD DE whose identity is known to me by £. Li hig be CI ue lE- K3-D (type of identification) (number) WS Sworn to and subscribed by the Respondent before me this 5 74 day Ey ; : , 2002. E Roberta Jones MY COMMISSION # CC392354 EXriZzS February 16, 2004 BONDED THRU TROY FAIN INSURANCE ‘NC APPROVED this fo Mde Professional Regulation By: Director, Division of Real Estate SNRP/jk ! he STATE OF FLORIDA _DERARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION 03 OCT - Mp: EBORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD FLORIDA’ DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & " PROFESSIONAL-REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE, Petitioner, V. CASE NO. 9984831 DOREEN H. CAMPBELL, Respondent. / ty ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT the Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate ("Petitioner") files this Administrative Complaint against Doreen H. Campbell (“Respondent"), and alleges: ESSENTIAL ALLEGATIONS OF MATERIAL FACT 1. Petitioner is a state goverment licensing and regulatory agency charged with the ~ responsibility and duty to prosecute Administrative Complaints pursuant to the laws of the State of | Florida, including Section 20.165 and Chapters 120, 455 and 475 of the Florida Statutes, and the tules promulgated thereunder. 2. Respondent is currently a Florida state-certified residential real estate appraiser having been issued license RD0001596 in accordance with Chapter 475 Part II of the Florida Statutes. 3. The last license the State issued to Respondent was as a state-certified residential real estate appraiser at 10810 NW 20" Street, Pembroke Pines, Florida 33026. 4. On or about May 4, 1998, Respondent developed and communicated an appraisal Pee; ExEype- oo Zz By . Pace __ go or 3 FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell : Case No. 9984831 Administrative Complaint report (Report) for property commonly known as 11820 62" Lane North. Palm Beach, Florida (Subject Property). A copy of the Report is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 1. 5. Respondent failed to properly supervise Sonia Alvarez, a state-registered assistant real estate appraiser, in the development of the Report. 6. Respondent admitted to Petitioner’s investigator that she did not select the comparables that were used in the appraisal report. ua 7. Ina letter dated January 12, 2000, Respondent admitted to Petitioner that she was unfamiliar with the market area involved in the development of the Report. A copy of this letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 2. 8. Respondent reported she verified her information for her comparables through ISCNET, REDI, Public Record, and visual inspection of the exterior. 9. Respondent admitted to Petitioner’s investigator that she did not conduct a visual inspection of the exterior or interior of the comparables. A copy of this admission is evident in Respondent's reply to Petitioner’s letter. Copies of this correspondence is attached hereto and incorporated herein-as Administrative Complaint Composite Exhibit 3. 10. The Report indicated that the estimated market value of the Subject Property was as of April 29, 1998. 11. The ISCNET printouts provided by Subject as part of her work file were dated May 4 and May 5, 1998. Copies of the ISCNET printouts are attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 4. PAGEL Gs BO FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell Case No. 9984831 Administrative Complaint 12. Respondent failed to retain a complete copy of her work file, in that she lacked any _ verification information pertaining to the Subject Property and she lacked any Public Records upon which she relied. 13. The Report contained the following errors: a. ga ISCNET reported that the living area for comparable #1 was 2165 square feet, but Respondent reported 2105 square feet. ISCNET and public records reported that Comparable #2 was built in 1994, but et Respondent reported 1997. ISCNET reported that Comparable #2 has a living area of 2567 square feet, but Respondent reported 2517 square feet. Respondent incorrectly reported the dimensions of the Subject Property. Therefore, Respondent also incorrectly reported the square footage of the Subject Property. See Administrative Complaint Exhibit 2. Respondent reported a comparable (comparable #1) that was not in the same market area as the subject property and failed to explain the similarity or difference of the market areas. Public records reported that all three comparables had pools. Respondent failed to : report and make adjustments for any of these pools. Respondent admitted that she failed to report that Comparable #1 had a pool. See Administrative Complaint Exhibit 2. Public records reported a recorded mortgage for Comparable #1 and ISCNET did LT ORI D) AINT Non Water LAG | 3 ADMINISTEY RAMEE Se - PAGE 0 a7 BO FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell Case No. 998483! Administrative Complaint not report any mortgage. Respondent failed to disclose this discrepancy. i, Public records reported that Comparable #2 had a spa. Respondent did not report nor adjust for a spa. j. Public records reported that Comparable #3 had a fireplace, but Respondent reported that it did not have a fireplace. k. Respondent reported that Comparable #1 had older kitchen equipment and Comparable #2 had upgraded kitchen equipment, yet Respondent never inspected NS the interior of the comparables. COUNT I Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice in violation of Section 475.624(14) of the Florida Statutes. COUNT I Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of having failed to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal report in violation of Section 475.624(15) of the Florida Statutes. COUNT II Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of culpable negligence or breach of trust in a business transaction in violation of Section 475.624(2) of the Florida Statutes. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Florida Real Estate Appraisal! Board, or the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, as may be appropriate, to issue a Final fey Be FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell Case No. 9984831 Administrative Complaint Order as final agency action finding the Respondent(s) guilty as charged. The penalties which may .be imposed for violation(s) of Chapter 475 of the Florida Statutes, depending upon the severity of the offense(s), include: revocation of the license, registration, or certificate; suspension of the license, registration or certificate for a period not to exceed ten (10) years; imposition of an administrative fine of up to $5,000 for each count or offense: imposition of investigative costs; issuance of a reprimand; imposition of probation subject to terms including, but not limited to, requiring the licensee, registrant, or certificate holder to complete and pass additional appraisal education courses; publication, or any combination of the foregoing which may apply. See Section 475.624 of the Florida Statutes and Fla. Admin. Code R. 61J1-8.002. The penalties which may be imposed for violation(s) of Chapter 455 of the Florida Statutes, depending upon the severity of the offense(s), include: revocation of the license, registration, or certificate; suspension of the license, registration, or certificate for a period not to exceed ten (10) years; imposition of an administrative fine of up to $5,000 for each count or offense; imposition of investigative costs; issuance of a reprimand; imposition of probation subject to terms including, but not limited to, requiring the : licensee, registrant, or certificate holder to complete and pass additional appraisal education courses; publication; restriction of practice; injunctive or mandamus relief; imposition of a cease and desist order; or any combination of the foregoing which may apply. See § 455.227, Fla. Stat. (1999) and : Fla. Admin. Code R. 61J1-8.002. ur FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell Case No. 9984831 Administrative Complaint SIGNED this 7° day LL Ca Ks 2001. Was b Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation By: Director, Division of Real Estate ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER Robyn M. Severs, Senior Attomey Fla. Bar No. 0154504 FDBPR-Division of Real Estate Legal Section 400 W. Robinson Street, N308A Orlando, Florida 32802-1772 (407) 481-5632 . (407) 317-7260 - FAX PCP: LM/EC/PA 5/7/01 NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS PLEASE BE ADVISED that mediation under Section 120.573 of the Florida Statutes, is not available for administrative disputes involving this type of agency action. PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that pursuant to this Administrative Complaint you may request, within the time proscribed, a hearing to be conducted in this matter in accordance with Sections 120.569 and 120.57 of the Florida Statutes; that you have the right, at your option and expense, to be represented by counsel or other qualified representative in this matter; and that you have the right, at your option and expense, to take testimony, to call and cross-examine witnesses, and to have subpoena and subpoena duces tecum issued on your behalf if a formal hearing is requested. FDBPR v. Doreen H. Campbell Case No. 998483] Administrative Complaint PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that if you do not file an Election of Rights form or some other responsive pleading with the Petitioner within twenty-one (21) days of -receipt of this Administrative Complaint, the Petitioner will file with the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board a motion requesting an informal hearing and entry of an appropriate Final Order which may result in the Suspension or revocation of your real estate license or registration. Please see the enclosed Explanation of Rights and Election of Rights form. APPRAISAL OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT: 11820 62NO LANE NH 95-42-41,E1/2 OF NW 1/4 OF N/E 1/4 OF SW 1/4 CE 1/4 PALM BEACH FOR: AMERICAN MORTGAGE RECEIVED 400 E COMMERCIAL BLYO #224 FT.LAUOERDALE, Fl 33398 954-771-303 BOCA RATON, FL 33431 JAN 1 9 2000 PIVSIUN UE Nene ED TATE AS OF: APAIL 29, 1998 RECEIvep BY: JAN 19 2gn P. p Sonia Alvarez, for Campbell & Associates DIVISION UF Ae, ‘ AGE ~~ lS NB ey ve Form GAT — “TOTAL 20C0 for Windows" appraisal software by ala mode, irc — 1-800-ALAMODE SUMMARY OF SALIENT FEATURES Subject Addiess 11820 62ND LANE N - Lega Dseition 35-42-41,61/2 OF NW 1/4 OF HVE 1/4 OF SW 174 OF 1/4 City PALM BEACH County PALM BEACH State FL Up Code 39412 Census Tract é Map Reterence 43-42-35 Sale Price $ 260,000 Date of Sale PNOG CONTRACT . Borrower / Client STEWART, JOHN/BUYER Lender AMERICAN MORTGAGE PA Sie (Squa Fee! 2,017 F Price per Square Foot $ 123.95 a Location SUBURBAN/AVG ES Age 1997(1) 8 3 Condition Good Fe} Total Rooms 8 a CJ Bedrooms. 3 Baths 2 Appraiser Sonia Alvarez, for Campbell & Associates Date of Appraised Value APRIL 29, 1998 Final Estimate of Value $ 250,000 E : pivistu Ur nent eotal L, Form SSO —~ "TOTAL 2060 for Windows* appraisal scitware by a la mode, xe. — 1-8C0-ALAMODE . UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT Laasaheld GAL DESCRIPTION Frege yee 250,000 AMERICAN MORTS, . fy Sonia Alvarez, far Camphell & Associates PY iraten titan Ril | Fredominany Bavlt ys 2 Ounn 78%s J Unter 25° occupancy | arty VANIAS. stable Gemantsurpk | Sworge 7 In balanes ~ Unies Jmos."-" 3-8 mes, ! Over ene ut Race and the racial composition of the neighborhood are not appraisal factors. Sf Heighbothaod boundaries and characteristies BOUNDARIES: NORTH: PERSIMMC. A EAST. WVOTH AVE N.. THIS IS AN ESTABLISHED PRIMARILY RESIDENT: Fatlers that affect the markelabilty cf the fice ibaihead (proximity to ense THE AREA HAS CONVENIENT ACCESS TO SUPPORTING AMENITIES, INCLUDING SCHOOLS. MAJOR THOROFARES/TRAFFIC ARTERIES. HOMES ARE MOSTLY NEWER, MEDIUM-SIZED, DETAC MAINTENANCE AND CONDITION ARE AVERAGE, WITH SOME RENOVATION NOTED, NO ADVER: IS CONSIDERED TO HAVE POSITIVE APPEAL TO THE HGME-BUYING MARKET SOUTH OXOCHOREE ROAD: WEST. 130TH AVE Si ANSPORTATION AND | LOTS H NOTED: THE AREA , vet Conditions in the subject neighborood (including suppatt fer the above conclusion sucn as dala on competitive gropritins for sale in the neigndcthood, desciiptica cf the pr ect THE GENERAL AREA MARKET IS STABLE AND ACTIVE, WITH TYPICAL FINANCING IN THE FO! NEW. CONVENTIQNAL MORTGAGES. So! VA TRANSACTIONS WERE ALSO NOTEO IN RECENT SALE RECORDS INTEREST BUYDOWNS AND OTHER SALES CONCESS OMIM R NECESSARY, ADJUSTMENTS FOR NON-TYPICAL FINANCING, WHEN MADE, ARE NOT TYPICALLY OOLLAR-FOR FLECT THE PERCEIVED EFFECT ON MARKET VALUES CAUSED BY THE FINA® ICING, IF ANY, N Project Information lor PUBS (if applicable) - - Is Ihe developer builder in contol cf the Home Approximate total number of units in the subject pioje Cescrihe commen elemants and tectaational tacit Rg Cimensions IRREGULAR Site area 54,450.00 SOFT _ Commer bel © tas Specific zoning classification and description oe 2oning comoliincs 7 Legal . a Leqai narcentotming (Grandfathared use) hat LEVEL, ABOVE ST GRADE AVERAGE RECTANSULAR APPEARS ADEQUATE Present u Olbet use (explain) _ - GOOD RESIDENTIAL Other | Off-site Improvements Tyre ping GOOD TYPICAL OF AREA _. FL POWER BLIGHT | Steet UNPAVED . i Sule: CONCRETE UNPAVED NONE asemerts TYPICAL UTILITY MONE Special Flocd Hazard Arey Yes 0 __| Steet lights PRIVATE Zona ZONE B 9 Date 10/18/82 Alley NONE 3 Map Ho_ 12019200508 . Is (Apparant adverse easements, encroachments, special assessments, slide areas, iagal oi egal nenes: 79 xoring use, etc.): THE SUBJECT LOT S TYPICAL & CONFORMING WITH OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD LOTS. NO ADVERSE EASEMENTS, ENCROACHMENTS OR OTHER ADVERSE SITE mA “ConOyTN NOTED. FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION, SEE LIMITING CO iDITIONS, PG 1, ITEM #5. Y GENERAL DESCRETIC EXTERIOR DESCRIPTION FO No. of Units one Foundation REINE CONCRET Isiab #9 flo. of Stories Exterior Walls Cos Crawl Srace HO Typ (Det ‘AN ) _|Rout Surtace ASPH/SHINGLE |Basement HONE Design (Style) Gutters & Ownspts. NONE Sump Pump N/A Exsting Picposedd Window Type ALUM.AWNINGS lOampnass N/A lore GRADE Age (is) 1997{1)__|StomnvScreens — NO/SCREENS —_ |e NORE ras AVAL Elteclive Age (¥is.1 NEW (1) {Manifactured House NO ‘ef NONE {STO FOR AGE/TYPE |. _foyen a Living _|__Dising | Kitchen Oca {tants fn | Pec. Frm {Bees Area Sq FI go ! a 1 1 | | 2.017 ; | T - j { t | L. L ! __ Me i | 8 Rooms : $5 tiving 93 : : HESTING YES YES ae af Floors CRET/CON TILE. MANG Type _REVCYCL : 2 vals DRYWALL JFuei ELECTRIC inange'Oven eet TrinvFinish = WOOD/PAINT Conriticn NEW Disposal 2-648 Bah Fluor “CERAMIC THLE SOCLINS CENTRAL |Dishuasher Bath Wainscot CERAMIC TILEMARBL iCential YES Fan Heed __ NX ~ J Ocors WOOD,GLASS Other _C.FANS ABOVE MAT'LS IN GOOD CONDITION ICondtion NEW Additional In, efficient dams, etc) COVERED ENTRY, COVERED SCREENED PAT SYSTEM FIREPLACE, ALL UPGRADED APPLIANCES AND KITCHEN CABINETS, CEILING FANS INS: Conttion of the improvements. depreciation (physical, functional, and external), repairs need IMPROVEMENTS ARE IN GO. PONDITION, WITH NO FUNCTIONAL OR EXTERNAL FOR AGE & TYPE OF DWELLING Eb Out. sch a3, bub net ima to, agwous wast tc.) t oroperty, NO OBVIOUS, VISIBLE EVIDENCE OF ADVERSE ENVIRO: SEE Lasting CCHDINONS PAGE 1. ITEM 6. APPRAISER IS NOT At ENVIROMMENTAL [2 . efor bly PAGE UNF 2 JA p THER INFORMATICH. | » Ferm ICS Form UN2 — “TOTAL 2008 for Windows” appraisal se SLACK Ur ERS ott Hf / UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT TMATED REPROCLE TIOt COST-REW-OF IMPROVEMENTS: 20s Saf @$ _ 75.00 151.275 piecerta’ COST DATA FR oe GINDE FOR S:!3JECT CHARACTERISTICS, 5,000 KNOWN TO APPRAISER (LOCAL BIIILDER COSTS, TMPAGT FEE FL@S 20.00 ___ 42,480 LAND-TO-VALUE RATIO IS TYPICAL OF AREA. NO VALUE IMPAC al Estimated Cast How : 168,755 SEE ATTACHED SKETCH FOR LAYOUT & LIVING AREA RECENT Erysical Functional = Extarnat LOT SALES UHAVAILABLE: LOT VALUE EXTRACTED FROM MARKET, = IMPROVED SALES. EXTRAS & SITE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDED AP 'Y WORTH. DEPRECIATION | 4 METHOD. COST FIGURES ARE REPLACEMENT, tO PER’ i i ~4 i (ROUNDED) s* Vatig of Ste Improvements LOSC,PVG MUDICATED VALUE BY COST APPROACH 252.255 ICLUDED. ESTIMATED REINS ECON LIFE 50 YRS 1 SUNeST COMPARABLE HO _ ND 2 "11820 62ND LANE N 3844 C ROAD 9085 APACHE BLVD “116157 KEYLIME BLVO PALM BEACH, LOXAHATCHEE ROYAL PALM BEACH-ACREAGE | ROYAL PALM BEACH. ACREAGE ; 11/2 MILE NORTH-NW 11/8 BILE NORTH 1 MILE SOUTH-Siv nat $ zat 260,000 ES ] § 1349 SRS real § . : 91.06 = [5 = INSPECTION, ISC |ISCNET/REDIPUBLIC RECORD | ISCNET/REDI/PUGLIC RECORD ISCHETREDI PUBLIC RECORD | _LOWNER, RED! __| VISUAL EXTERIOR/ VISUAL EXTERIOR, VISUAL E i CESCRIPTICN DESCRIPTION si=isAeue [7 Oe + 025 : NiA : CONV/ADJUST CONVIFIXED : WA 172,000 ee 119,000 TAREAGAERERRBESE| 04/97 STABLE 02/93 03/98 SUBURBAN/AVG — | SUBURBAN/AVG SUBURBAN/AVG SUBURBAIAVG BA (easehoi Fes Simp | FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE , 54,450 SOFT 217,800 SOFT -25,000 [ 97,138 SOFT -7,000 | 50,094 SQFT __ ee GOOD RESIDENTIA | AVG/GOOO/RESID $10,000 | GOOO/RESIDNTL _| AVG/ GOOD RESID +10.000. RANCH/AVG/GOOE | RANCH/AVG/GOOE - RANCH/AVG/GOOE RANCH/AVG/GOOE 7 | CBS/AVG CBS/AVG : CBS/AVG CBS/AVG 7 : 1997(1) 1975(23) : +5,000 [1997(1) [ 1996/2) onsition G000 BELOW AVERAGE ° _+20,000 | GO00 6000 BF Above Grade Total" Berms | Baths | Total Bdims — Baths ° Tolal_Bdims: Ext, Total Bdims @iths Focm Count 8.3: 219 4 3 1,500; 9 4 3 1500/8 = 3 2 Gross Living Area 2,017 Sq Ft 2.105 $9. Fl 0 2.517 Se ft -7.500 2,405 Sq Ft 5,800 Basement & Finished ] [} 0 0 Rooms Batow Giads | NO BASEMENT __| NO BASEMENT NO BASEMENT NO BASEMENT _. Functional Utility | AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE Hi lesan CENTRALAVG [CENTRALAG CENTRAL AC STO INSULATION | STO INSULATION ULATION = STO INSULATION _ Garaqe/Caypr 2-CAR GAR 2-CAR GAR . 2CARGAR 2 CAR GARAGE ___ Bet Porch, Patio, Cech. COV.ENTRY COV.ENTRY COV.ENTRY COV.ENTRY a Fireplacess), etc. ONE ONE NO F/P +1500 | NO F/P. +1,500 ence, Pool etc. SCR.PATIO SCR.PATIO ~ |ScR.PATIO SCR.PATIO Kitch Egl. Extras UPGR K AITCH | Ear STO.OLOR EQT +5,000 | UPGR KITCH EQT STO KITCH EQT +2,800 vet Adj. {total E ae i Adjusted Sales Price x f ones i GE. TUS 1S. THCESS LAND, THE MARKET DOESN'T RECOGNIZE ABIG DIFFERENCE IN PRICES PAID FOR OVERSIZED LOTS, AS THE AREA WHEAE SALE #1 1S, FOR EXAMPLE, WAS BUILT UP BEFORE MAJOR DEVELOPMENT. SALE #1 WEIGHTED, SIMILAR HOME SIZE ANO #2 WEIGHTED OE TO SIMILAR LOCATION/NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. SUBJECT'’S CONTRACT ALSO WEIGHTED. LLER, NEWER HOMES SELL HIGHER PER S.F. SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO. 4 | ¢ 0.2 I COMPARABLE NO 3 PRIOR TO THE AB } PRIOR TO THE ABOVE SALE, PRIOR TO THE ABOVE SALE, PRIOR TO THE ABOVE SALE, NO SALE RECORD | NO SALE RECORD WITHIN NO SALE RECCAD IN THE NO SALE RECORO WITHIN PAST 12 MONTHS. | THE PAST 12 MONTHS PAST 12 MONTHS. THE PAST 12 MONTHS Analysis of any cutent aginerent of saz, option, cr fisting of subject property and analys's cf any grior sales of THE SUBJECT PROPERTY'IS LISTED FOR $250,000. PER THE OWNER AND CUR SOURCES, Lt st and comparab'as within one ye2 cl the dite of acpraisal: ER CONTRACT AT THAT PRICE. INDICATED VALUE BY SALES COMPARISON APPROACH S_ 250.000 MIDICATED VALUE BY INCCME APPROACH {4 Apolicabiel Estimated Market Rent NIA q NIA =3 . PAM This appraisal is mace |! ‘as ist {_# subject to the eapaits, aterations, inspections cr conditions listed t _] subject to completion cer plans & spectators, Conditions of Sparat THE SUBJECT is APPRAISED ‘AS IS* AND THE REPOAT iS SUBJECT TO TI ASSUMES NO HIDDEN DEFECTS. inal Recencdiation. All approaches to value have been considered and analyzed as to theit teliabiity acd applicability. In the final acalysis, the Sales _ Comparison (ot Markel] Approach is weighted, as most sellective of the actions of buyers & sellz’s in the marketplace. The Cost Aoproachis also a ule GRM. Income Approach is t/a. ca the above conditions and the centicat O48 (Revised 06/93 d AS OF APAIL 29, 1998 By 250,000 : ica SS ona DORE! ApH CAMPBELL H Ace fOHed [i es 7 bit ler “Campbell & Associates lnszeet Property 4.4998 __.. _ ‘ation # _R00001596 RECEIVED St: Lignase # State Certitind: Residentiat Real Estate Apesa Site AN] 4 $1 peivige Moe Foe Hees O23 = ATTACHED STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS. wv purpose cf this appraisal is to estimate the market value cf the seal property [hat is the and limiting conditicns, and market value definition that are stated in the attached Fred TOWE) ESTHIATE TF MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, OF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT IS (WHICH IS THE ly INSPECTION AND ser DATE OF THIS REPORT) Ti , comngent n Pega Residafiial 8 Estate Appraiser EAR MA EAT of Campbell & a \ “MAY 4, 1998 y Z tal ation in Slate Registered Real Estate Appraiser Stale Bac Sime Licerse # 000 4162 State FL et tobe PAE 2 Foim UA2 — “TOTAL 26C0 for Windows® appear eby ali meds, -z.— peco.auencld DIVISION UI REAL ESTAL If, i Subject Photo Page ty Ades 11 PALM BEACH Lender AMERICAN MORTGAGE ScmmwerCien STEWART, JOH! iptose 33412 Subject Front 11820 62HD LANE N Sales rice 250,000 GLA 2,017 Total Reems 8 Total Bedims 3 Total 3athras 2 Location SUBURBAIV/AVG View GOCD RESIDENTIAL Sis $4,450.00 SOFT Quatty CBS‘AVG Age 1997(1) 4“ Subject Rear Subject Street RECEIVED JAN 19 200° QivIDIVN VE REAL Essay. tby alamov. ce — 1-300-aLAtopE M Ch bbs Form PIC-4x6.SR — “TOTAL 20C0 far Windows™ anptaisal sct Comparable Photo Page Y 2 PALM BEACH County PALM BEACH E those aa2 ‘ AMERICAN MORTGAGE i Comparable 7 3444 C ROAD Comparable 2 9086 APACHE BLVD Proximity Sale Price 260,000 GA 2.517 Total Recms 9 Total Bedims 4 Tota Bathims 3 Leeation SUBUABANIAVG View GOOO/RESIONTL Ste 97,138 SC=T Quaity CBSIAYG Ags 1987 (1) Comparable 3 16157 KEYLIME BLVD Proximity Sue Price 219,000 GLA 2,405 Tota coms 8 Total Bedins 3 Total Bathrms 2 Locaticn SUBUR 3A}, AVG/ GOCO Ri: 50,0 Soe Qeatty C8S/ANG Age 1996(2) RECEIVED JAN 19 2gna DIVISION QE heaL totale If i Form PiC4x8.CR — ToTst 2¢00 fcr Windows" appraisal so Comparable Photo Page Comparable 4 3444 C ACAD 77 SUBURTA AVS AVG/GOICC AES!D 217.809 SOFT Ousity CESIAVG age (G75 S Comparable 2 9086 APACHE BLVE Proximity Sale Price 250,000 GLA 2,517 Total Rooms 9 Total Becims 4 Total Bathims 3 Location SUBURBAN/AYG Vi GOOD/RESIONTL Site 97,138 SOFT Quality COSIAVG Age 1997(1) Comparable 3 16157 KEYLIME BLVO Proximity Sale Price 219,000 GLA 2,405 bee Tota Recms 8 ° Teta Sedims 9 Total Bathims 2 on SUBUREA? AVG? GOOD 50,05: C8S/AVG 1996(2) RECEIVED : re : rary | pace . 3 ira S Sadie taes acy ‘ ness SESH PRS 0 Ae SG PrASture Uh WEAK cotnl he Foam FICAx8.CR — “TOTAL 2000 for Windows paisa software by ah mers, re, — 1-200-ALAMIOCE a (tf Building Sketch [SctonevGient_ STEWART, JGHN/BUYER Property Address 11820 62NO LANE N [Cty PALM BEACH County_PALM BEACH Sims FL Tplece 3d412 ender AMERICAN MORTGAGE tLe ssnsteesc4 NEASUREMENTS : TOTAL 32.0 1LBC0 E20 URE H #30 i ie : 23 WLPALM SEACH 3) 5" = -23'5 als; cae te “23,0X% 7,5 = 172.5 S.0} 9.9 SCR/PAT 0 13.0 6.08 2.8 - “15'0 NeSET “W90X 25 = -42.5 AREA 26,0 X 24,5 = 637.0 zoo Tot Livable: = 2,017 DIN KIT MBDR 43,0 neLd uy 2-CAR GAR [24.0 MBTH Total Livable = 2,017 0) Total Garage == 624 Total Patio = 403 RECEIVED JAN 4.9 7008 fe Ob Kent EStaTé Fotm SKT.BHISkI— “TOTAL 2600 fer Windows® appraisal scttware by a fa mez. inc. — 1-8C0-ALAMOOE a / ( "yy Location Map [Boucwer Crest STEWART. JOHN/BUYER [Progeny Adciess_ 11820 62ND LANE N PALM BEACH i ___. County PALM BEACH AMERICAN MORTGAGE _ j ay GARDENS} rE 7 ’ ai l 1 Yae0 wR i Holy i or 37] eae ied me i = 2 RECEIVED | gan U9 2009 Form MAP.LOC — “TOTAL 2600 for Windows® appraisal scttease by ala mode, ite. — t-BCO-ALAMODE . | iP f MULTI-PURPOSE SUPPLEMENTAL ADDENDUM FOR FEDERALLY RELATED TRANSACTIONS Camabell & Associates Apprusers, Inc SIEWART, JOHN BUYER _ _ _ _ | Fropenty Audiass 11820 62010 LANE N _Counly PALM BEACH Te _ ip tees gani2 j ' Ths cose Sugclemental Adcendum tor Federally Retaled Transactions was designed to provide the agpra' taniweal abarss and racuiramacts of the Feferal Repost tncitraee Comparation (PCIE), te O4f'ce cf th Suaarsisicn (07S), the Resolution Trust Corpesation (RTC), acd the Federal Reserve. This Multi-Purpose Supplemental Addendum [s for use with any appraisal. Only those statements which have been checked hy the appraiser apply to the Property being appraised, ¢ cf the appraisal is to estimate the market valu® of the subject piocerty as defined he: ‘dluating the subject property far lending purposes. This is a Federally related ansacticn. Care eer Tha appraisal is based on the information gathered by the appraiser from public teecrds, cther ident Ces, inspection of the subject property and aighborhocd, anit selection of comparable sales within the Subject maiket area, The ctiginal soutce of the Comparables is shown in the O23 Scurce section ct the matkat grid along with the sowce ef confimation, #f available, The Originy source is presented ltst. The sources and data 2 cons: eliadle. Whan contlicting information was provided, the source deemed mast reliable has been used. Data believed to be unvaliable was not included in the regcit ace used as a basis fcr the value conclusion “7 The Reproduction Cost is based on _MARSHALL & SWIFT RESIDENTIAL COST GUIDE/HANDBOOK supplemented by the appraiser's knowledge of the local market, ” "Physical denieciation is based on the estimated effective age of the subject Property. Functional andicr exsinal depreciation, ft present. is scecticalty adstessed in tha appvaisal report or other addenda. In estimating the site value, the appraiser has refed cn personal knowledge cf the local markel. This i knowledge Is based on prior andor current analysis of site sates and‘or abstraction cf ste valves trom sas cf improved picpecties, The subject property is located in an area of primarily Qwner-cecupied single family tesidences and the Income Approach is not considered lo be Meaningtul. For this reason, the Income Approach was not used ("1 Tha €stimated Markel Rent and Gross Rent ‘Muhiplier utilized in the Income Approach ase based car the argraser's drowledge of the sub: markel aea, The rental knowledge is based on prior and/or current rental rate Surveys of tesidertial prcperties. The Gress Rent Sluniplier is based cn prict and‘or cunert 's of prices and market rates fcr residential propetties, For income producing properties, actual tents, vacancies and expenses have been reposted and analyzed. They have been used to project future ients, vacancies and expenses, According to” OWNER AND MULTIPLE LISTING SERVICE RECORDS Ihe subject propesty “ad has.pol been offeced for sale in the past 30 days. ] iscuventty offered tor sale for $ 250000 was.ottered for sale within the past 30 days for $ Gt'ering information was, considered in the final reconciliation of value. .| Ottering information was not considersd in the final reconciliation of value, + ONering informatica was not available, The reasons for unavailability ard the steps taken by the apps explained later in this addendum, a sHeavautaehimld Acceiding io _ THE OWNER AND PUBLIC RECORDS [2] has.noltransteyred in the past twelve months. _' has transferred in the past bveNve months, ~~ All por Sales which have occurred in the past tive Seas STE months are listed below and reconciled to the apsra'sed value, ether in the body cf the inthe addenda, t Dare Sales Price Document # Seiler Buyer 7 i i : i 1 | ; | ~- : i ~ fi H i of cs i i : Pou - [a : ; oO Subject property is not kccated in a FERIA Special Flood Hazard Atea “N } t “} Subject property is located in a FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area, Hl Ss t Tone FEMA MapiPanci # Map Date Kame of Community } : ;~ ! t 2 ZONE B 42019200508 10/15/82 SEE #30VE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ‘ The eommuety dees pot participate in the Haticnt Ficad Insurance Program _ Tha commnisnity aiticipate in the Hatendt Feed Insurance Program : t Wis covered by a regular program RECEIVED i iH ed by an emergency picgram. . : JAM AG 7009 | Pagel? DIVISION Ub Rem Clende Foun MPA —~ “TOTAL 2CC0 tor Windows® ay paaisal sottsiare by ala moc, int — 1-850-ALANCDE 2 (ef s CURRENT SALES CONTRACT: © The subject prenedty is current nel under contract Tre neeteact ante) escrow ins ChORS were ect wIlab'e fer even The “he soniract anv( cr ssciaw insttctions wera re The following summ y:23s the contract Contract Date Amendment Date Contract Price Selier i | i ! 250000 KITTRELL, RONALD O 3 CHERIE J # Contract indcatad thal personal property yas not included in the saie. The coctract intcated that personal property was ipciyded. it consisted ct Estimated cord: =) Persarial property was.oLincluded in the final value estimate, ~, Parsenal property was included in the final value estimate, a... The contract indicated nofinancing conces: Gr other incentives +... The contract indicated the following concessions ar incentives: hecked for similar ce: Market Value defined 4 concessions or incentives exist, tha comparables we! that the final value conclusion is in compliance with | 3-6 months is considered a reasonable muuketing pericd for the subject sroperty basedcn = FUBLIC RECORDS, MULTIPLE LISTING SEAVICE TTPO TT TN 7 ~ J ADDITIONALICERTII ine Appraiser certifies and agrees that: (1) The analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report was prepa Agcraisal Practice ("USPAP*), except that the Departure Provision of the USPAP & nat apely. of the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated resuit,-or the Occuttence of a subsequent event, (3) This appraisal assignment was not based on a tequested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the azzroval cf a foan. The vatya estimated is based on the assumption that the property is ot negatively affected by the existence ct ervsiranmertal coruiitions unless otherwise stated in this separ, The appraiser is not an expert in the identtiz: any apparent signficant hazardous substances ot detrimental environmental cendtiions which would atfect the in this report. It is possible that tests and inspections made by a qualified hazardous substance and envitonr hazatdcus substances cr detrimental environmental conditions on or around the property that would negat: party negatively uniess expert would reveal zect ts value. ooo SRE RUE eA PDITLONALICOM environmental canltions. The appraiser's routine inspection of and inquities about the subject property did rct develop any irformation that indice: in comtormity was the Undcrm Standards ct Pictessicral (2) Their compensation is not contingent upon the Fepoiting of predetermined value cr ditection in value that t201s the cause of the client, the amcunt Oate Prepwed MAY 4, 1998 Phone # {954 ) 450-7007, Fax 954-450-7009 Txi0 # _65-0435024 '] The co-signing appraiser has. personally inspected the subject property, beth insize and out, and has m: listed in the report. The report was prepared by the appraiser under ditect superv'sica ct the ce-signing tesponsibilty for the contents of the report including the value conclusions and th ‘ending ecnditicrs, tilly to the co-signing appraiser “The c2-signing appraiser has.not personaly inspected the inletor of the subject procesty and 1 N33 ast inspected the exterior of the subject property and al comparable sales list the report. _' has.ingzected the ‘or cf the subject purcerty and all compatabie sales listed in ir tepert {The recert was prepared by the appraiser une: direct Surervision of the co-signicg 2cpraisai. The o0-857'rg appraiser accer! contacts of the report, including the vatue conclusions and the limiting conditions, ard eortizms that Appaiser with the eycepticn of the cert a regarding physical inspections. The stove describes tk CO-signing appiaise: i The co-signing appraiser's level ct inspection, involvement in the appraisal process and certdication are of this appraisal, “20 extericr inspection ct all comparas's sales et, The co-signing appraiser ac: cefims that the cestticalions app! — LIGENSE/CERTIFICATION TPES oe a NATURE'S CO-SIGNING* wn En Signing WA = 7 ; Appraisers Soouie 0 Geet a ’ Etisctive Oats APRIL 29, 1958 Duis Pusaied MAY 4, 1998 Co-Siqning Apprnisey’s tame (print) OH Campbell, tor Campbell & Associates Pizre © (954) 450-7007,FAX 954-450-7009 State FL LE Lecense “.: Coutticatca # RDOOOTS9G 19 # _65-0435024 Fare Jet? Form MPA — "TOTAL 2CC0 for Vindows* appraisal software by aly mods, ez — 1-EC0-ALAMOCE RECEIVED Jat 19 2000 i te NT ta fA, DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE: Tre most probate price which a rrocerty A fa z requests tO 1 tae sve, the beyar and seller, each acting Prudenily, krowiedgeably ar} assumrg the 3 4 by ; SS Imetect in thes, “etaihon i tke consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the Passirg of tte trom sater to bs 33 Rye aliy: os | (2) beth paities aie wall infoomad o¢ well advised, and each acting in what be conselers bis on s fasine in the open market; (4) payment is made in terms ot cash in US do'la:s or in 'S of fina-e 3! arrangements comparab’e thereto, and (5) th price roasts the rermat consweration tor the picperty sold unaffected by special or c: financing et s2iss concessions* Qianied by anyone assctiated swith the sie *Adhistments to the comparables must be made tor special er cre for these costs seller pay ing cr sans ¢ hase normally paid by sears as a tesiilt of tradition ot lay in a s these costs in virtually all sales transactiens, at or cre, by comparisons ta financing terms offried by a tid p. POAT, OF Iransact! Any adjustment should nat be catculaled on 2 at dollar fer but the dot ameurt of any acliuslment should approximate the market's teactcn to the aparaser’s judgement STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS AND APPRAISER’S CERTIFICATION CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: The appraiser's conmbhans cation that appears Ibe appraise tegert is subject to the fe sing 4 Tre appraiset will net be responsible fcr matters of a legal nature that affect ¢ the progerty being ‘The property *d cr the title to @ The appraiser assumes that cpraiset cn the basis oft being under 1 be 2 The appraisar has provided a skelch in the appraisal repo to show anpiowimate dimensions of the the reader of the cepert in visualizing the property and understanding the appraiser's daterrainaticn of its size. s and the sketch is included onty to assist Av guarantees, express of imptied, regarding this determination. 1 The appraiser wil not give lastimony cr appent in cout because he or she made an appraisal of the grerarty in question, unless speedic atangements tc ¢o 50 have baen mate belorehand, 4 The appiasar has estimated the value of the fand in the cost approach at its highest and best use and tte imgrovenvents al their conliibutory valze. These sayarale valuarons of the fand and improvements must not be usad in conjuncticn with, any cite: acpraisal and ate invalid # they are so used. iation, the presence of hazardcus wastes, toxic f curing the rotmal research inched in pectcinins of unppuent cenditicns of the pre; make the ploperty more or less valuabie, and tegaiding the condticn cf the proy Tre 6. The appraiser has noted in the appraisal repert any adverse conviitions (such as, needed repaits, day substances. etc.) cbserved duting the inspection of the subject propeity or that he or she became aw: the appraisat. Unless otherwise stated in the appraisal report, the appraiser has co hrowledge cf any averse envitgnmental canditens (inchiding the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic sud ‘ances, ete.) that hues Assumed that there are no such conditions and makes no guarantees or warren PXEIASS Cr Appeaiser will rot be tespensible for any such conditions that do exist of for any argireesing ot te curilitions exist Because the appraiser is nol an expert in Ihe tik of envitcrmental hazard Pnvitormental assessment of the property 4 from soutces thal he cr she censiders to be y Gf such dems thal were furnished by clhes 7 The appraiser obtained the information, estimates, and Opinions that were expressed in the arpraisal teliable and believes them to be true and correct. The appraiser does not assume fesponsibility for ihe patting, far in the as cf Pictassional Aporaisat Practice & The appiaser will net disclose the contents of the appraisal tepcrt except as 9. The appr has based his or her appraisal tepod and valuation conclusion fc: appraisal th tations cri the assumption that completion of the imgicvements will be performed in a workmarike manner, {2 Tha angrier must p including ccrclusicns about the property vatue, Ihe appraiser's identity and pr Gsgaaizations cr the frm with which the appraiser is asscciated) to anyone other than insiner: consi professional appraisal organizations: any slitz or federally appro.ed financial instts! cf the United States or any state or the Districl cf Columbia, except that the lender/client may distribute the collection ct tepertieg fs} without having to eblain the appraiser's print Ge obtained befcra Ihe appraisal can be comeyed by anyone to tae publ assigns, Tm d77 6.93 Pace lef? Campbell & Asseciat Form ACR — “TOTAL 2000 for Windows’ appraisal sot APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION: The Agpraset caries and agiens that i J have mseuchatl the subject market area and have selected a minimum of three iecent sales of gicp for consideration in the sates comparison anaksis and have made a dollar adjustment y.han acpropeiate Io 12! the market machen tc tho: IS of s.qnficant nition, If a sqaticant item in a comparable property is supsior to, oF mace fav than, the subject picgerty. 1 have made a re: '2 reduce udiutsted sales price cf the comparable and, # a significant tem in a comparable Grocery 1s infarc ‘able than the sit cperty | hyre mate YT Pesires aillusttieny to increase the adjusted sales price at the compatabie. . the subject property 2-1 have, taken wig consideration the factors that hive an impact on value in my knowingly withhed any sigedicart information frem the appraisal argent and | bel appedisal report are tse and ecrtact @. to the bast ct m: 4, [stated in the anpraisal report only my own personal, unbiased, and professional ana! 4nd hinting condiions spect.ed in this form. is. Cpinions, ard conch:sicns, which ate sub cr’, to the contingent + T have no preseat or prespactive interest in the property that is the subject to this report, ard | have re srasent er prospective pe Fespect to the participants in the transaction. ( did not base, either pattially or comp! on the tee, cc'cr, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or naticnal ctigin ct eather the 5: Owners OF accupants of the prcperties in the vicinity of the subject preperty, ral i ter bias wath my analysis andicr the estimate of market value in the appraisal legort ‘cecupants of the subject grocer; oF of the gresent 5 I have ro fi appiaisal is continge t or contemplated future interest in the subject property, and neither my current cr tutus employment mcr my compensaten for Pettorring this on the appraised value of the progeity #$ ct requited to vepcit a predetermined value of ditection in vatue thal favors the cause of the cian Ct any telated party, the amount ct the value estimats, he attainment cf a specific cesutt, or the Occurrence of a sudsequent event in cider to receve my comperszica and cr employment for perc: the apcraisal. | dnt cat base the appraisal report on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, os the need to approve a spectic mertgage loan. 7 V performed this appraisal in conformity with the Uniorm Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice thal were adopted and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board ct The Appraisal Foundation and that were in place as of the effective the exception of the departure provision cf those Standards, which dees oct apply | acknowledge that an estimate of @ reasonable time for ‘osute in the cpen el is a condtion in the cefinition cf market vatur and the estimate | developed is consistent with the marketing time noted in the neghdcihood section cf this report, unless | have cthersise slated in the teconciliation section, 8 [have petscnatly inspected the intaticr and exterior areas ct the subject propeity and the exterior cf all picrestes listed as comparables in the appraisal report. {futher caitity that {have noted any apparent or known adverse conditions in the subject improvements, cn tte s! site, Green any mM the immediate vicinity of the subjact propesty of which { am aware and have made adjustments for these adverse conditions in my analysis of the property to the extant that Ina market evidence to support them. Ihave also commented about the effect of the adverse conditions an the maskstabilty of the subject proge:ty 9 I personally prepared all conclusions and cpirions about the seal estate that wera sat forth in the accraisal report. tt | relied cn sigrdicant prctassional assistance fiom ary individual ot individuals in the performance of the appraisal or the preparation of the secvaisal fepert, | have named such individual's) and disclosed the specitic tasks performed by them in the leconcitiation section ct this agpr: A at any individual so named is cualfied to pero the lasks, | have nol aulhovited anyone to make a change to any item in the report; thi change is made to the appraisal report, | will lake fo responsibilty for at. and agrees thal: 33. Of the aczraiser, SUPERVISORY APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION: Ia Supervisory ecpraiser signed the azpiaisat seport, he ot she ce | directly supervise the appraiser who prepared the appraisal seport, have reviewed the agcra'sal repert, ag: the stalemects and conctusies agree to be bound by Ihe appraiser's certifications numbered 4 through 7 above, an! am taking fu rasponsibility for the appraisal and the appraisal reper. ADDRESS OF PROPERTY, APPRAISED: 11820 62ND LANE N APPRAISER: . SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (only Hf required): \ Le KK fea . een ’ f oe t.. a7 signa 2 VL Nao Sg opie tame: Sonia Alvarez, tor Campbell & Assotiates .H. #1 impbeli & Associates Cate Signed: MAY 4, 1998 f i State Certticalion # State Registered Reat Estate Appraiser . fication #. ROOCO1S96 Of State Licanse #: RIQOO4162 7 Cortitied Resicl Real Estate Aporaiser State: FL Expiration Date of Certification ot License, 11/30/98 ion Da enzcatien ot License: 14/30/98 i> Det Not nszect Piecesty RECEIVED gan U9 2000 pIision OE KeAL ESIATE r eres ers fren Form ACR — “TOTAL 2CCG fcr Windows* appraisal software by ala move, ing — 1-6C0-ALAMGOE 7 / b ART, JOHN BUYER SUPPLEMENTAL ADDENDUM rly Adztess 11820 62ND LANE N Oo y_ PALM BEACH County PALM BEACH Sp FL Hie Be ao ~~ 2 an - id 335 CAN MORTGAGE #7 (a) COUNTY CORREGTEO TO PALS eS 3CH (c) O/MER STATES THAT HE PURCHASED PROPERTY FROM FATHE! OBVIOUSLY NOT AT MARKET VALUE. (THEREFORE SELLING HIGHER NO (d) NO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION FEE {NOT A PUD} (b) SEE PAGE 2 OF URAR FORM. (PROX'MITY APPEARS ON OUR SCREEN PHT OID MGT PAs, 1) SHOT a8] ARMY'S LENGTH TRANSACTICI THESE (TEMS WERE INCLUDED IN THE CRIGINSL FORMS SHIPPED WiTH THIS E°LE, Ot] WIS FASES. CUR COMPUTER RE-t OATA FROM ANOTHER FILE AT CLOSING OR CPENIG THE FILE, {BLANKING OUT PROWMITY, CHATIGING COUNTY TO DADE, PUTT " BUOF ETC) IT ALSO FILES THE ENTIRE REFCRT UNDER INCORRECT ADDRESS & DATASSSE FILING. THIS. BUT HAVE REFRINTED THIS PAGE 28 8, THE CORRECTED PAGES, ENCLOSED. ONCE AGAIN, OUR APOLCGIES DATA. WE APCLOGI AGES, REPLACING ae —_——_ ’ , or SS 3 1. “3p q iT PAGE RECEIVED gan 19 2000 DIVISIUE UE REAL ESlATE se T-ECALAMOOE >t / Ws Form SUP — “TOTAL 20C€ far Windows® appraisal scttware by ala mote, Supplemental Addendum Ecrrowes Client STEWART, JOKN/BUYER ma Property Addiess 11820 62ND LANE N | Cty PALM BEACH County PALM BEACH FL Tetos 3240 Lender AMERICAN MORTGAGE ADDITIONAL DATA SQURCES, NOT DETAILED IN REPORT (PERSONS PROVIDING SIGHIFICANT ASSISTANCE): THE APPRAISER OBTAINED MULTIPLE LISTING SERVICE DATA FROM REAL ESTATE AGENTS IMVOLVED tt THE TRANSACTION, SELLING AGENT OAVIO LEAVIS, AND KATHY COURTN EY (LISTING, PALM BCH COUNTY) MLS LISTS & OTHER DATA ARE DETAILED IN OUR FILES, ALONG WITH DATA FROM OUR USUAL SOURCES, ISC OF MIAMI, REDI, PUBLIC RECORDS. CriBit i) IN cannes) RECEIVED JAN 19 2000 DIVISION Ob Kray EDIAte by alarece, ine, — 1-B00-ALAMODE 2 of St Form TAO — “TOTAL 2000 for Windows” appraisat software Campbell & Associates, Appraisal & Home Inspection 10810 NW 20 Street, Pembroke Pines, FL 33026 Ph: (954) 442-0006 ~ Fax 450-7009 Pgr 546-0453 January 12, 2000 , Mr Dennis Thresher - RECEIVEn Via Facsimile — 954-917-1324 MUMS IN ee GG JAN 5080 Coconut Creek Pkwy, SteA = EXHISy D 19 2009 Margate, FL 33063 PARE 20 - 36 — Dear Mr. Thresher, PMUSION OF nem. es tare This letter is in response to yours, regarding DBPR#RD99-8483 1. I have retrieved the file in questign, and will attempt to answer the concerns raised in the complaint. Iam sending the workfile for the case, including original research, field notes, etc. If you need anything further, please contact me. Ms Alvarez & I both, of course. intend to input data to adjustment grids & other parts of the report, accurately. We apparently omitted sale #1°s pool. That was in the ISC data but not on the grid. This was one data input error and a review oversight, not “a series of errors, which in the aggregate would be misleading”. The April 98 data we had shoived only sale #2 with a pool. Whatever errors exist in our work as fallible humans; fraud has never been committed ar Campbell & Associates. There was also a computer ‘glitch’ associated with this file. Some data would not effectively stay over-written from the template, as noted in the file notes. It remains in our database under the wrong address, changing back when we close the file. It is marked “bad file - don’t copy”, as are probably a dozen others from the past two years. We accept human proofreading responsibility; however, we generally assume data remains as written. When that fails, it’s always a surprise how much we rely on machines, which are also ultimately fallible, but not fraudulent. MLS is used by many appraisers, including the complainant, We got our sales from that source, through the real estate agents involved. We confirmed them through our ISC source/public records. We have two names, with a cellular phone & fax number. There was no ‘plethora’ of sales nearby in 4/98. In fact there were two. See our dated ISC searches, one done estate people faxed over MLS lists & offered local market knowledge. We welcomed more data, from what's considered a reliable source. We typically quite MLS on the grid, 2 lines down from the proximity line our computer blanks out on closing/opening this corrupt file. I don’t know if the data reverted to template data or we didn’t mention it there. We note such contribution in addenda, typically, and it is in this file (see file copy) This file was done in April, 1998. Our file contains dated ISC printouts, showing no pools for sales #1 & #3. Data also lacks other improvements cited in the complaint. This data shows 2 baths for sale #3, all points in the complaint. Possibly inaccurate records (then) or improvements added later. Even with benefit of hindsight. no fraud here. Simply an appraisal done 20 months ago, with data available then. The complaint notes a “plethora” of sales. (only in comparison to the 2 we found) I searched comps (ISC) for 9 sq miles, for the 18 months between our appraisal & hers. Five Sales in 18 months aren't much, either. Five grouped sales, throwing out the high, the low & the $100 quit-claim ‘sales’ which are probably refinances or divorces. They are low, which is a cause for concern. But they did not exist in April, 1998, Whether homes sell through MLS or by owners, they all should be recorded. and reported in ISC. Skanes’) mérObte found there? The Subject’s recorded size is 2,299 sf (living) and 2,888 sf adjusted. Square potas Ff jd Bt2E06y adding to living area, % the garage, and fractions of patios & other improvements. We generally use Ning area as recorded for sales, and the Subject’s is measured. The adjusted square footage is a guide to the extent.ofé. emmap es eténts. The more extras & amenities a home has, the greater difference betveen living & adjusted'sq. footage. Palm Beach count’s usually far more accurate than Dade. If living area is found significantly in error for the Subject. one can develop a ‘multiplier’ bv which it’s ‘off. Same models in the area, when labeled the same (wrong) size as the subject, & by observation appear the same. are reported with the Subject’s measured size. We haven't been spelling out these methods in reports. but this will now be part of addenda, for reference by report readers, Lbelieve now more than ever" eléaret is better. A? |S Yo Uf sale #1 had, at the time of our appraisal, the barn, workshop. etc Ms Kerr lists. { believe we'd have seen thest. and they should have been on record as a large ‘adjustment’ to propery size. That's not the case: in fact, the difference js far less than the Subject’s adjusted versus living area numbers. I believe the market, and the sales we used. have changed. The property's foreclosure status Must influence the way the appraiser now looks at it, The benefit of hindsight is immeasurable. That doesn't make the prior appraiser guilty of fraud. We discovered a difference between the field sketch & the finished sketch in our report, that accounts for about the difference between Ms Kerr's sketch & ours. This was apparently error in reading & interpreting field notes when sketching on the computer. Measuring larger would raise the Subject’s value: we measured smaller, Our intent is to avoid all errors. if possible. Again, this is not a series of errors, not misleading to inflate value, not indicating fraud The mortgage broker involved in this case has attempted value pressure. many times, Months after this case. he got very upset (with me, that time) for asking the listing agent & seller about a home & transaction. Same buver & morgage broker. In retrospect, that seems significant. It was a waterfront home in Ft Laud, which I believe had a false contract price. They hadn’t sent the requested listing brochure. When I asked about time on market, other offers & asking price, the buyer (who was there) called the mortgage broker, who called me, ballistic. I said I couldn't havé interference with data-gathering, and bowed out. They ‘valued our opinion & input’. but had “another appraiser, more flexible & familiar with the market’ who'd do the job. I don’t feel comfortable making accusations (to authorities, especially) based only on suspicion. I dissociate myself from people whose dealings seem questionable. Without proof, I'm just a trouble-maker, out of business. I can’t police mortgage brokers: it’s too big a job. Appraisal work doesn’t pay enough to risk my license for a fee, nor any customer. I've said to many customers, “I know you make ‘normal’ loans, with credible sale prices. Please don’t waste my time”. When a property’s ‘contract’ isn’t supported by the marker, we get irate calls, “Why didn't you Say it wouldn't appraise?” We're caught in the middle, accountable to the state, the banking industry, and a number of peers whose job is finding our deficiencies. As humans, we can make enough mistakes, without considering fraud. I'd like to see all dishonesty out of the industry. Dishonest appraisers hurt me, too. But I truly believe they're in the minority: the problem's elsewhere in the process, When [ review work, I don’t Assume fraud. I'd learned my lesson about American Mortgage & Steve Tacher before this case came up for discussion. This was nearly 2 years ago; before ‘creative financing’ became so popular. It Was just starting then. I'd never seen what I considered a “bogus” sale. No-money-down was a special FHA program. as far as [ knew. We take almost nothing at face value, today: we look for inconsistencies, question every sale price. The past 18 months have been a sobering lesson in real estate & mortgages here in south Florida. We keep more on the computer now and have two public-records based sources, We're working toward a more reliable process, for better quality. Our photos are all digital (we were changing over then) and we have more automation & integration (electronic plats, scanning, integrated sketch) as well as EDL We also have more real esiate contacts, more MLS data. I'd decided to get MLS online at my office already, Decision reinforced. That data’s input by state-licensed salespeople. One hopes we could share data & feel confident of it. I'd personally like to see a big, complete, reliable database for & by appraisers. I doubt we can ever make the process 100% foolproof or always find complete. similar. ironclad data. I do know my appraisers are cautioned (not just by me ~ continuing education stresses this & the papers are full of bad appraiser press) against any type of fraud. : T trust Ms Alvarez (daily) with my very livelihood. Obviously, I’m responsible for what appraisers do under my direction. We must take that risk to grow. I take my responsibility seriously, and hope I’ve answered the concems of the Board adequately. I know my own ethics, and those of Ms Alvarez. [ have never had reason to doubt her intentions. nor can | imagine such a situation, ever. Shes not only honest, but eMicient and hard-working. I'm proud to have her oa my stati. I hope I've addressed the items as I should. If there is any further data vou need, pleas call me at one of the above’ numbers. " ESL UG r = EU; Pace ReceBeR 3G — JAN 1 9 2000 DIVISION OF EAL EMIATE /s/ Y/ Respectfully, Doreen H. Campbell St Cert Res REA #RD0001596 DepsRTMENT OF Business & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION seb Bush Cynthia Henderson Governor Secretary _ July-31, 2000 Ms. Doreen Campbell 10810 NW 20" St. Pembroke Pines, FL 33026 DPR CASE NUMBER: 9984831 Dear Ms. Campbell: Please be advised that this investigator has been instructed to ask you the following questions: 1. Did you make adjustments to comparables in your appraisal report for the property located at 11820 62™ Lane, Royal Palm Beach, FL, without you or Sonia Alvarez, your registered assistant appraiser ever inspecting them. 2. What methodology did you use for making the adjustments? Please respond jn writing within 7 (seven working days of receipt of this letter). Thank you for your patience and cooperation in this matter. Sincergly, Ake Dennis Thresher Investigation Specialist II Bureau of Enforcement ADMINISTRAT I E ee td EXHIBIT oe? oe PAGE > of Be DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE REGIONAL OFFICE Vil 5080 COCONUT CREEK PARKWAY, MARGATE. FLORIDA 33073 Telephone (9$4)917-2324 Fas (934)953-1343 7 Campbell & Associates, Appraisal & Home Inspection 10810 NW 20 Street, Pembroke Pines, FL 33026 Ph: (954) 442-0006 ~ Fax 450-7009 August 3, 2000 Dennis Thresher ADaipt.~ Div of Real. Estate 5080 Coconut Creek Pkwy Margate. FL 33073 Dear Mr. Thresher: Your first question doesn’t have a ves or no answer. At the time of the appraisal assignment, I did aot realize eversthing 1 know now. I remember Sonia saving she had difficulty finding some Palm Beach sales thar week. But I didn’t put it together until this case came up for review. that she hadn't personally seen any of the sales. We accepted help offered by a person we thought was a licensed real estate agent. Those people input data (add & amend listings) in the MLS. which is an accepted data source. Reviewers & aopraisers all over the country quote it daily. We all know the parties to the sale were not dealing honestly now, with the aid of hindsight and foreclosure. Then. it seemed logical that the person who made the sale. worked the area. knew what else the buyer saw & chose from. could be helpful: and that person appeared to be a licensed professional. We followed the nile that says. “if you don’t know enough, get help”. Prior to state certification of appraisers. [ was a broker, as an appraiser. That person and I would be equals. Even Now, brokers may do BPO’s (amounting to appraisals) exempt from USPAP. That would seem to make then’ more trustworthy or responsible than appraisers. above us somehow. The answer to question | is that we did. however I didn’t realize it at the time. The second question is methodology, Lacking cnough sales for matched pairs. we used adjustments derived from & proven effective in similar rural areas. Typically, extras contribute about half their cost to added value. Pools costing $15,000 to $20,000, add about half that to the home value. The land was adjusted at a much lower rate than in subdivisions. Excess land is evident as a concept in rural areas. We've leamed a lot in the past wo years about mortgage fraud, recordkeeping. and the our changing real estate market. Id heard this (state inquiry) experience is very educational, and I now agree. The principle of substitution works, due to competition, with one exception - Mortgage fraud. We hadn't heard of that in 1998. MLS is now online at our office, and we question everything. Over 2 vears ago. it didn't seem logical to ask or pay more than similar homes were bringing. within a small margin. I wouldn't have believed they could Find 3 sales too high for the area. to “feed” us, so that we could be drawn in. We have rural areas in Dade & Broward. with homes on I~, 2.5 & 5-acre parcels. I'd worked extensively in rural SW Dade: I didn’t think about Sonia possibly feeling out of her element in the country. Sonia had done a few rural homes in Dade. But the combination of the spread out area. scarcer comps (typical of lower density & slower-developing areas: homes are held longer) and the distance from ‘home’ may have put her off-balance. Rural assignments are in the minority. Loaly see this locking back. fam confident in our abilities, as [ was then. Neither of us knew fraud was an issue. nor would we ever go along with any of that. Many factors contributed to the defrauding of the bank and the appraisers. Fraud, but not ours. I can telf Vou, It would be far more difficult to fool either of us today. We apologize for being slow to grow suspicious. We were gullible. and now we're very cynical: we doubt most of what we see. even. We question our vocation. at least weekly. . [see much more good appraisal work than bad. Foreclosures are far more often due to divorce. lost jobs. than fraud. Especially not appraiser fraud. I don’t believe appraisal is for devious people: they can profit more elsewhere. with less scrutiny, The complainant acted with benefit of hindsight & foreclosure. She seemed displeased that we went to Palm Beach. She & other Palm Beach people appraise here. Dade appraisers go to Palm Beach & bevond. Now, mans “cover the state”. which I doubt is possible. competently. What about nationwide *hubs’? How about this suggestion: Limiting appraisers to counties adjacent to their own. or a 75 or 100-mile radius might serve to let us communicate & cooperate more: to know our areas better. and to spend more time verifving and less time traveling. Branch oftices would have a local head. state certified. The other view is that there's enough diversity in most counties ina given state, that neighborhood types are simply replicated elsewhere: such as beachymountainresort. uzdan. suburban. tural... I'll leave that to the state: ['m just thinking of how to do a better job. with more confidence & less risk. OMADL INT / ‘ 5 y 3 Eagle Doreen H. Campbell PI1C-O1 CAMPBELL | 3S: FOLIO 00-41-43-17-0i-324-0010 O31 PAZIE SED BTH HB BLT apg SQFT SALEY 3444 C RD 334750 3 1975 ‘ OWNER'S NAME AND ADDRESS WGY 2P PLR BLDG. USE AMOS BOBBIE J- 1 SINGLE FAMILY 3444 C RD LESAL DESCRIP LOXAHATCHEE FL LOMAHATCHEE GROVES 33470-3840. E 602.5 FT OF N 1/2 &N .,. LOT CHARACTERISTICS OF TR 24 BLK C 217,800.00 SOF TYPE: CEN TRT-BLK 78.090 TAX YR==> 97 AMT==> 1,923.58 PAID2==> 7 TAX/Pre= 0.85 PRIOR ¥R DLO==> yy ASSMT YR BUILDING AGRICULTURE LAND TOTAL ASSMT SO/ET 1997 62,206 42,500 23, 600 85,806 38.158 SALE DATE AMOUNT BOOK PAGE Q DT SALE DATE AMOUNT BOOK PAGE Q pr APR. 1997 238,900 ' 9766 1626 U WD AUG. 1987 136,000 .5391 1013-0 an SEP. 1989 100 6199 650 Dac JUN. 1984 95,000 4576 1381 Uy aD MORTGAGE COMPANY AMOUNT DATE MTG TYPE RATE NUMBER MTK YR BLDG LAND TOT VALUE SLUC CLUC BLDG CDE HOMEST APPR LE 97 62,206 23, 600 85,806 6% 9910 0101 0 N YX SELLER=> FI=DEED/MTG; F6=COMPS MENU F2=BLDG(S); F4=TAXES; F5=EXT LEGAL; F7=DIMENSIONS; F8=FEATURES; F1S=S¥E PI10 PREVIOUS MORTGAGE PRESENT - F1=VIEwW Ise ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT “ls? RECEIVED JAN 15 0A Ce DIVISION Ur nen wointé ao 35/04/98 BTH HB BLT ADJ SQFT SALE\SOFT 3 4i 3 1994 3,077 84.49 1.42 OWNER" S NAME AND ADDRESS GV P FLR BLDG USE EFFBLT LV SOFT MARK F FRIEDMAN &W LOURY , P 0 SINGLE FAMILY 1994 2,567 9086 APACHE BLVD LEGAL DESCRIPTION WEST PALM BEACH FL 18-42-41, W 249 FT OF © 2648 PLATBOOY 33412-2514 , FT OF N 389.49 FT OF S$ 638.49 LOT’ CHARACTERISTICS FT OF SEC A/K/A AC-226 PLATPAGE 97,138.80 SOF TYPE: ; PHONE NON PUB TAX YR==> 97 AMT==> 4,112.58 PAID2==> Y TAX/FT==> 1.33 PRIOR ¥R DLO= N ASSMT YR BUILDING AGRICULTURE LAND TOTAL ASSMT 50/ ET 1997 N/A N/A N/A 182,845 59.42 SALE DATE AMOUNT BOOK PAGE © DT SALE DATE AMOUNT BOOK PAGE Q pT FEB. 1998 260,000 10250 594 WD JUN. 1984 13,500 4282 379.U WD NOV. 1994 100 8512 394 DB QC JAN. 1980 6,800 3238 1262 MORTGAGE COMPANY AMOUNT DATE MTG TYPE RATE NUMBER GREENPOINT MORTGAGE CORP 172,000 022398 CON ADJUS 6.50 MTK YR BLDG LAND TOT VALUE SLUC CLUC BLDG CDE HOMEST APPR LP 97 162,094 20,851 182,945 01 0100 0100 25000 N N SELLER=> THOMAS AND BRIDGET RICHARDSON F1=DEED/MTG; F6=COMPS MENU F2=BLDG(S); F4=TAXES; FS=EXT LEGAL; F7=DIMENSIONS; F8=FEATURES; F15=SKETCH PI10 RECENT DEED/MTG PRESENT ~ F1=VIEW Isc L Cant ADWANISTRATIVE © cca cru EXHIBIT #7 PAGE 2B a: ao RECEIVED JAN 1 9 2000 DIVISION OF Kean csialé a\ 29 PTLO-O1 CAMPBELL 3 COMPARED To: 14081 KEvLiIM LE/05v5 FOLIO 00-4¢0-42- 25- -00-059-5040 001 PAZIP BED BTH HB BLT ADJ SOFT SALE 2\soer ny 16157 KEY LIME BLVD 33470 2 1996 2,968 73.78 1.35 OWNER'S NAME AND ADDRESS © W GV P FLR BLDG USE - EFFBLT LV SOFT DENNIS E LECROY Z 0 SINGLE FAMILY 1996 2,405 MARY C ROTH=LECROY LEGAL DESCRIPTION 16157 KEY LIME BLVD 25-42-40, E 204.6 FT OF H PLATBOOK LOXAHATCHEE FL 33470-5826 4764.7 FT OF N 243 FT OF S . .;, LOT CHARACTERISTICS 2743 FT OF SEC A/KA 1-74 PLATPAGE 50,094.00 SOF TYPE: PHONE 561 795 0347 TAX YR==> 97 AMT==> 3,375.30 PRID?==> Y TAX/FT==> 1.13 PRIOR YR DLO==> yy ASSMT YR BUILDING AGRICULTURE LAND TOTAL ASSMT SQ/FT 1997 N/A N/A N/A 161, 483 54.40 SALE DATE AMOUNT BOOK PAGE Q DT SALE DATE AMOUNT BOOK PAGE Q DT MAR. 1998 219,000 10311 775 WD DEC. 1991 100 7062 607 D wp JAN. 1996 18,900 9082 1098 U WD DEC. 1989 10,000 6282 579 U wD MORTGAGE COMPANY AMOUNT DATE MTG TYPE RATE NUMBER WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK 119,000 032798 CON FIXED N/A 18736282 MTK YR BLDG LAND TOT VALUE SLUC CLUC BLDG CDE HOMEST APPR LP 97 6,000 13,225 161,483 01 0100 0100 25000 .N N SELLER=> GARY W AND LEE TANDY _ FI=DEED/MTG; F3=COMPS LIST F2=BLDG(S); F4=TAXES; FS=EXT LEGAL; F7=DIMENSIONS; F8=FEATURES; F1S=SKETCH PI10 RECENT DEED/MTG PRESENT - F1=VIEW ISC ( sie b RECEIVED JANIS D6 leg DIVISIOW UF Roan wo aie Tt i

Docket for Case No: 03-003579PL